Failing to implement samba on solaris 8

[serafino]

I'm trying to get Samba working on my Sun/Solaris 8 workstation. I downloaded samba-3.0.2a-sol8-sparc-local.gz from sunfreewar.com and performed a pkgadd and it executed successfully. I also installed the following additional packages:

popt-1.7-sol8-sparc-local.gz
libconv-1.8-sol8-spacrc-local.g (already had this as a result of installing firefox)
readline-5.0-sol8-sparc-local.gz
ncurses-5.4-sol8-sparc-local.gz
libgcc-3.3-sol8-sparc-local.gz (already had a C compiler (gcc-2.95.3) so I just got the libraries for 3.3)

I created my 'smb.conf' file in /usr/local/samba/lib/ and modified it accordingly.

I then executed the following command (as per instructions):

# testparm /usr/local/samba/lib/smb.conf

Which returned the following error:

ld.so.1: testparm: fatal: libsendfile.so.1: open failed: No such file or directory Killed

I then went to google and found a patch that had dependencies which in turn had dependencies and so on.

I'm not sure I should continue down this path because I see no end in sight regarding patch dependencies. Please advise as to the correct path to take at this point.

 

[alray]

Just had the same problem myself.

You need to install libsendfile.so.1 yourself, to do this you need to install patch 111297 and all it's dependances. The easiest way to do this, probably, is to install the latest recommended patch set.

HTH

Ray

 

[serafino]

Thanks. How does one determine and find the latest recommended patch set?

 

[serafino]

I'm on sunsolve and am looking at a section that it titled 'recommended solaris patch clusters' I looked in README for 'Solaris 8' and 'Solaris 8 Sun Alert Patch Cluster' and neither contain 111297 or 111298 which address my issue regarding 'libsendfile.so.1'. Perhaps they contain all the prereqs and I will check this but this seems more diificult then it should be. Any suggestions?

 

[serafino]

Okay I gave it the old college try but no matter how many patch streams I followed and no matter whether it indicated that there were no dependencies. I couldn't even install the huge kernel patch due to dependencies. Please help as I'm stuck.

 

[alray]

Just checked for myself and 111297 isn't included in the latest Solaris 8 patch cluster.

In that case you have to do what I did, get patch 111297 and check its dependancies against your installation and work backwards. In my case this jusr involved loading 4 patches [108995-06, 111295-01,109025-05 & 111297-01].

HTH

Ray

 

[serafino]

My Solaris 8 is old (at least a couple of years). Some of the obsolete streams for some patches are as many as 30 versions long. I went to single user mode and tried to install the kernel patch but it had 3 dependencies. I'm not sure how to get his done. Perhaps install the latest patch cluster and then go from there.

 

[serafino]

Okay I'm installing the recommended patch cluster for Solaris 8. There were 2 flavors 'Solaris 8 sun alert' and just 'Solaris 8'. I chose the larger the 'non-sun-alert' patch cluster with perhaps the mistaken belief that more patches is good not bad. I hope I chose wisely. At any rate I'm charging ahead with the hope that I have enough patches where putting 111297 on will not be such a headache (with the hope that most dependencies will be satisfied). There was language in the 'sun-alert' version that does not exist in the 'non-sun-alert' version that has me worried. The language is the following:

'This cluster contain the minimum set of Sun Alert patches that contribute to the concerned Solaris Release. It also contain all the required dependency patches, which may or may Sun Alert patches. These Sun Alert Solaris patches
are considered the most important and highly recommended patches that avoid the most critical system, user, or security related bugs which have been reported and fixed to date.'

Any thoughts?

 

[serafino]

Okay I finally got 111297-01 installed. This is what I had to do:

1) Install the 'Solaris 8' recommended patch cluster.
2) Install 108995-06 (a 111295-01 dependency).
3) Install 111295-01 (a 111297-01 dependency).
4) Install 109025-03 (a 111297-01 dependency).
5) Install 111297-01 (whew!!!!)

An interesting detour for a single patch.

Regards George...

 

[serafino]

I just ran testparm against my smb.conf and got the following:

ld.so.1: testparm: fatal: libpopt.so.0: open failed: No such file or directory Killed

Gee this is fun!

 

[serafino]

Should I start fresh. Get Samba from samba.org, compile it and call it a day or should I continue on the path I'm on? I've put alot of effort and time into this only to be thwarted again due to a lack of yet another library (libpopt.so.1) but I'm stubborn and would like to get the package method to work. Please advise as to best course to take at this point.

 

[alray]

Sorry I didn't get back before but they actually wanted me to do some work!

Having installed the patches you will need to reinstall samba [i.e. remove it and then install it again]so that it can pick them up and add the file strings to some of it's configuration files. I found it easier to do this rather than try to modify things manually.

I know how you feel but your nearly there!

Ray

 

[serafino]

Ray;

I executed a 'find' for 'libpopt.so.0' and it was not on my system. Unless 'libpopt.so.0' is an alias for something else I'm not sure that reinstalling Samba will do the trick as it isn't there but of course will try it.

By the way thanks for taking an interest.

George...

 

[mattaw]

Looks like there was a mistake in installing popt. Try redownloading it and installing it again.

Then check the LD_LIBRARY_PATH as that controls where solaris looks for libraries.

Matthew

Family motto: Curvus, non infractus.
The Universe: God's novelty screensaver?

 

[serafino]

It turns out to be not much of a mystery. The problem with the missing popt library was simply the result of not executing a pkgadd for the popt package. Thanks for all the help gentlemen.