Hi Tim,
Well, this makes the 2nd or 3rd time I've had libs not installed
that the database says are installed. When I set this system up, I knew
I'd be needing some of the backwards compatible libraries, and installed
everything I could find. This one however, the 2.3.3 is NOT installed
as of yet, and not sure it's in the compat libs in the first place.
Googling came up wiht some odd places to find it, but none were for the
centos build, or even rh for that matter. I don't recall the name, but
I thought linux libraries were all pretty much the same across the
various flavors. I suppose not.
And the rpm-ql..... it gives the location of the compat libs, but
again, it's not finding the 2.3.3 version, and until it does, this
software will not run.
Tim Edwards wrote:
> Sam Drinkard wrote:
>
>> Hi Jay,
>>
>> Just double checked, and rpm *says* they are installed, but if I
>> can find them. Where are the compat libs located in the tree. I'll
>> do a manual search. If they are not there, that won't be the first
>> time that rpm has lied to me on libraries being installed.
>
>
> Have you done rpm -ql packagename? That will tell you where all the
> files are installed. I've had RPM fail on a corrupted database before
> (but it was easily rebuilt) but never had it lie about packages that
> aren't there.
>
--
Snowman
