>>>>> On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 18:03:41 -0300, Daniel Bareiro said: > > On Thursday, 29 July 2010 09:19:50 +0200, > Pierre Bourgin wrote: > > > Hello, > > Hi, Pierre. > > >>>> But when trying to run the startup script, I get the following > >>>> errors: > >>>> > >>>> [r...@localhost scripts]# /etc/init.d/bacula start > >>>> Starting the Bacula Storage daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-sd: error while > >>>> loading shared libraries: > >>>> libbacpy-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or > >>>> directory > >>>> Starting the Bacula File daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-fd: error while loading > >>>> shared libraries: > >>>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or > >>>> directory > >>>> Starting the Bacula Director daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-dir: error while > >>>> loading shared libraries: > >>>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or > >>>> directory > >>>> > >>>> But the files are: > >>>> > >>>> [r...@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so > >>>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 24083 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so > >>>> > >>>> [r...@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so > >>>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 228325 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so > > >>> Have you ran ldconfig? It generates the "available libraries" cache for > >>> the > >>> dynamic linker, and the dynamic linker is relatively strict about not > >>> searching various locations throughout the filesystem. > >>> > >>> You can verify dynamic linking capabilities with "ldd /path/to/binary". > >>> > >>> Also, you may want to consider Security Enhanced Linux. Verify with the > >>> "sestatus" command whether SELinux is enforcing the targeted policy, and > >>> if > >>> so, consider restoring the default context for the files freshly installed > >>> using restorecon, and if all else fails, please get back to us with ls -Z > >>> output ;-) > > >> I was also trying to install Bacula 5.0.1 using the same procedure as > >> mentioned in previous email and I have the same problem. This procedure > >> was successful in Debian with the difference that there I updated a > >> previous version instead of installing from scratch. > >> > >> Like I said, I followed the steps mentioned in the other email (I did > >> not run ldconfig manually) that had been successful in Debian. Using ldd > >> with these two libraries, I get the following: > >> > >> [r...@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so > >> libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b4eb5ee7000) > >> libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b4eb61e7000) > >> libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b4eb646a000) > >> libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b4eb67c2000) > >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000) > >> > >> [r...@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so > >> libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b97a2131000) > >> libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b97a2431000) > >> libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b97a26b4000) > >> libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b97a2a0c000) > >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000) > > > what is the output of 'ldd /usr/sbin/bacula-sd' ? > > # ldd /usr/sbin/bacula-sd > libz.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00000032b9000000) > libbacpy-5.0.1.so => not found > libbaccfg-5.0.1.so => not found > libbac-5.0.1.so => not found > libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00000032b8400000) > libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00000032b8000000) > libssl.so.6 => /lib64/libssl.so.6 (0x00000032bb000000) > libcrypto.so.6 => /lib64/libcrypto.so.6 (0x00000032ba800000) > libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00000032ba000000) > libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00000032b8800000) > libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00000032ba400000) > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00000032b7c00000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000032b7800000) > libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /usr/lib64/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 > (0x00000032bc400000) > libkrb5.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3 (0x00000032bdc00000) > libcom_err.so.2 => /lib64/libcom_err.so.2 (0x00000032bcc00000) > libk5crypto.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x00000032bd800000) > libkrb5support.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libkrb5support.so.0 > (0x00000032be000000) > libkeyutils.so.1 => /lib64/libkeyutils.so.1 (0x00000032bc800000) > libresolv.so.2 => /lib64/libresolv.so.2 (0x00000032bd400000) > libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00000032b9400000) > libsepol.so.1 => /lib64/libsepol.so.1 (0x00000032b8c00000) > > > Apparently, in spite of being the libraries in the operating system, for > some reason it is not finding them.
It looks like you are running a 64-bit bacula-sd, so the libraries should be in /usr/lib64. The files you found are in /usr/lib, which are normally 32-bit. Either you have the 32-bit libraries installed by accident or the 64-bit libraries are installed in the wrong place (broken rpm?). __Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
