Re: Installation/configuration issue

Thanks.

I'm in the process of reinstalling. But I'm doing it on an unsupported Linux platform so I'm flying, if not blind, then at least a little near-sighted.

Besides. The install worked fine. It's the configuration that's killing me (that sounds a little like the old adage about encryption... Encryption's easy. It's decryption that's a pain).

But sometimes all that's needed is a reminder that it's not rocket-science. Just follow the instructions. But how do the rocket scientists encourage themselves? That it's not brain surgery I suppose. But the brain surgeons have simply got to admit that there stuff's hard. No 2 ways about it.

"Howard J. Rogers" <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:nVOL9.5236$jM5.15156_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> OP=Original Poster.
>
> What Sybrand is hinting at, in his inimitable style, is that although (and
I
> agree with you on this) the install documentation is about as riveting a
> read as a fresh roll of toilet paper, if you follow it, religiously, every
> step of the way then installation of 9i is a piece of cake. And there
should
> be no need to fiddle-faddle your way around it with creating symbolic
links
> or anything similar.
>
> Even this renowned Windows fan can do a Suse 7.3 - Oracle 9i install with
> his eyes shut these days.
>
> Not that I particularly like doing it, but aside from a bit of kernel
> recompilation, it's a walk in the park.
>
> Point is: it either works, or you did something wrong (that last one
happens
> to me all the time on Linux!). Blow the thing away and try again.
>
> Regards
> HJR
>
>
> "alan" <alanbrown_at_pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:POOL9.2215$KY4.1657_at_newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
> > I don't know about 'hacking my way out'. I just responded to the Oracle
> > Installer's demand that I have a certain file. I was happy to read the
> docs
> > but they weren't very instructive in getting past that error.
> >
> > BTW - at the risk of inviting further insult, what does 'OP' mean?
> >
> > alan
> >
> > "Sybrand Bakker" <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message
> > news:tqpuvugni5jv452rns4oeknpcqgf8qta7f_at_4ax.com...
> > > On 17 Dec 2002 06:12:33 -0800, pagesflames_at_usa.net (Dusan Bolek)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >"alan" <alanbrown_at_pacbell.net> wrote in message
> > news:<uNyL9.414$dW7.53903375_at_newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>...
> > > >
> > > >Heh, looks like HJR's gentle remmark, about missing operating system
> > > >specification, failed to succeed. There is need to push harder.
> > > >Hellllloooooooooo, Sybrand, come here!!! Here is some work for you.
> > > >:-)
> > > >
> > > >Dusan
> > > >
> > > >> Well, I've ruled out the gcc aspect of things. I've fixed the old
> > package
> > > >> problem. But I'm still getting the segmentation fault. I suppose
> it's
> > > >> becoming a java issue! :)
> > > >>
> > > >> but if anyone can help, I'd appreciate it.
> > > >>
> > > >> alan
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Rhetorical question : did Oracle ever support gcc on any
> > > implementation of Unix.
> > >
> > > Obvious answer: No, why would they
> > >
> > > The OP clearly doesn't want this type of advice, he just wants to hack
> > > his way out without reading any doco and warnings.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
> > >
> > > To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Tue Dec 17 2002 - 18:21:11 CST