RE: Why should we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL during oracle product installation?

  • From: <Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <shastry17@xxxxxxxxx>, <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 08:41:12 -0400

On Solaris 5.8, the LD_LIBRARY_PATH is unset on my systems for 10g, and
set for 9i, as that has changed in 10g for Solaris.

It is annoying to discover some documents do state to set it -- such as
as Chapter 8 OUI OPatch user's Guide B16227-03 software patching.
(however the same document give examples of unix commands with incorrect
syntax in the previous sample... so setting the variable is also
probably a mistake).



Joel Patterson
Database Administrator
joel.patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx
x72546
904  727-2546

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anand
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 10:18 PM
To: Jared Still
Cc: oracle-l
Subject: Re: Why should we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL during oracle product
installation?

Hi Jared,

Yes you are right!!..you could have re-directed me to google if you
didnt want to give suggestions, Thanks for your valuable reply. But my
question in general is why in some case we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL.
are there any particular reason?.

I don't understand this sentence.  It seems to imply that you don't
think
LD_LIBRARY_PATH is necessary with 10g.

Yes I thought the same that 10g doesnot require any Kernel assumptions.
Correct me if iam wrong.

reg,
Anand

On 5/17/07, Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 5/17/07, Anand <shastry17@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> > Why should we assume LD_ASSUME_KERNEL with some value during oracle
> > installation. Is that because the kernel versions are different for
> > different operating system's and oracle works on specific Kernel
> > version to enable glibc optimizations or are there any core reasons
> > for this?. Please let me know on this.
>
> Rather than cut and paste from Werner's informative website, I will
direct
> you to google for it. Googling for LD_ASSUME_KERNEL Oracle brought up
> the answer in the first 2 hits.
>
> > Also RHAS4 has 2.6 kernel, maybe that's the reason why the
> > LD_ASSUME_KERNEL issue has disappeared.
>
> No, Oracle 9 requires this with the 2.6 Kernel.
>
> > The 10.2.0.1's oraenv script does still have LD_LIBRARY_PATH in it.
> > Please give me your sugesstions.
>
>
> I don't understand this sentence.  It seems to imply that you don't
think
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH is necessary with 10g.
>
>
> --
> Jared Still
> Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: