On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 11:23:29AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> I don't think anything "should" be required from libucb.  As I understand it,
> libucb is intended for backward compatibility to SunOS.  Forward going, or
> new development on Solaris should not require it.
> 
> Wonder if something triggered configure into thinking you were on SunOS
> rather than on Solaris?
> 
> I also checked the source by grep'ing "ucb", both 2.4.2 and 2.4.4.  I may
> have overlooked something, but I only noted ucb used in terms of commands,
> like /usr/ucb/MAIL, /usr/ucb/lpr, etc.
> 
> Perhaps your library search path specifies /usr/ucblib earlier than some
> system library directories.  Then when the system finds a function in
> say libucb that matches the name of the one some other current library,
> it chooses the first one it finds.
> 
> Things to check:
> 
>   The command 'crle' prints (among other things) the path the dynamic loader
>   searches by default
> 
>   echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH will show how you might modify that search path
> 
>   Do you set any --with-library=... in your configure command
> 
>   Do you have a setting of LDFLAGS in your environment or on the configure
>   command line
> 
>   Same for CFLAGS and CC.
> 
> 
> Like I mentioned, I see no reason for amanda to want libucb.
> But I've been wrong before, many times.
> 

This has been fixed by our Sun-God. While he didn't give me specifics on
what he changed, he said "The problem was more with the compile
environment than anything else." He did mention having to recompile with
gcc2 and "hack the %@#* out of libtool." He did not make any
modifications to the amanda source tree at all.

Thanks for everyone's help on this. This gets me one major step closer
to rolling out amanda for our network.

-- 
eric a. Farris
http://eafarris.al.umces.edu/