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
