>>>>> On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 18:03:41 -0300, Daniel Bareiro said:
> 
> On Thursday, 29 July 2010 09:19:50 +0200,
> Pierre Bourgin wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> 
> Hi, Pierre.
> 
> >>>> But when trying to run the startup script, I get the following
> >>>> errors:
> >>>>
> >>>> [root@localhost scripts]# /etc/init.d/bacula start
> >>>> Starting the Bacula Storage daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-sd: error while 
> >>>> loading shared libraries:
> >>>> libbacpy-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or 
> >>>> directory
> >>>> Starting the Bacula File daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-fd: error while loading 
> >>>> shared libraries:
> >>>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or 
> >>>> directory
> >>>> Starting the Bacula Director daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-dir: error while 
> >>>> loading shared libraries:
> >>>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or 
> >>>> directory
> >>>>
> >>>> But the files are:
> >>>>
> >>>> [root@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so
> >>>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 24083 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so
> >>>>
> >>>> [root@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so
> >>>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 228325 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so
> 
> >>> Have you ran ldconfig? It generates the "available libraries" cache for 
> >>> the
> >>> dynamic linker, and the dynamic linker is relatively strict about not
> >>> searching various locations throughout the filesystem.
> >>>
> >>> You can verify dynamic linking capabilities with "ldd /path/to/binary".
> >>>
> >>> Also, you may want to consider Security Enhanced Linux. Verify with the
> >>> "sestatus" command whether SELinux is enforcing the targeted policy, and 
> >>> if
> >>> so, consider restoring the default context for the files freshly installed
> >>> using restorecon, and if all else fails, please get back to us with ls -Z
> >>> output ;-)
> 
> >> I was also trying to install Bacula 5.0.1 using the same procedure as
> >> mentioned in previous email and I have the same problem. This procedure
> >> was successful in Debian with the difference that there I updated a
> >> previous version instead of installing from scratch.
> >>
> >> Like I said, I followed the steps mentioned in the other email (I did
> >> not run ldconfig manually) that had been successful in Debian. Using ldd
> >> with these two libraries, I get the following:
> >>
> >> [root@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so
> >>          libstdc++.so.6 =>  /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b4eb5ee7000)
> >>          libm.so.6 =>  /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b4eb61e7000)
> >>          libc.so.6 =>  /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b4eb646a000)
> >>          libgcc_s.so.1 =>  /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b4eb67c2000)
> >>          /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000)
> >>
> >> [root@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so
> >>          libstdc++.so.6 =>  /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b97a2131000)
> >>          libm.so.6 =>  /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b97a2431000)
> >>          libc.so.6 =>  /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b97a26b4000)
> >>          libgcc_s.so.1 =>  /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b97a2a0c000)
> >>          /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000)
> 
> > what is the output of 'ldd /usr/sbin/bacula-sd' ?
> 
> # ldd /usr/sbin/bacula-sd
>         libz.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libz.so.1 (0x00000032b9000000)
>         libbacpy-5.0.1.so => not found
>         libbaccfg-5.0.1.so => not found
>         libbac-5.0.1.so => not found
>         libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00000032b8400000)
>         libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x00000032b8000000)
>         libssl.so.6 => /lib64/libssl.so.6 (0x00000032bb000000)
>         libcrypto.so.6 => /lib64/libcrypto.so.6 (0x00000032ba800000)
>         libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00000032ba000000)
>         libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00000032b8800000)
>         libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00000032ba400000)
>         libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00000032b7c00000)
>         /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000032b7800000)
>         libgssapi_krb5.so.2 => /usr/lib64/libgssapi_krb5.so.2 
> (0x00000032bc400000)
>         libkrb5.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3 (0x00000032bdc00000)
>         libcom_err.so.2 => /lib64/libcom_err.so.2 (0x00000032bcc00000)
>         libk5crypto.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libk5crypto.so.3 (0x00000032bd800000)
>         libkrb5support.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libkrb5support.so.0 
> (0x00000032be000000)
>         libkeyutils.so.1 => /lib64/libkeyutils.so.1 (0x00000032bc800000)
>         libresolv.so.2 => /lib64/libresolv.so.2 (0x00000032bd400000)
>         libselinux.so.1 => /lib64/libselinux.so.1 (0x00000032b9400000)
>         libsepol.so.1 => /lib64/libsepol.so.1 (0x00000032b8c00000)
> 
> 
> Apparently, in spite of being the libraries in the operating system, for
> some reason it is not finding them.

It looks like you are running a 64-bit bacula-sd, so the libraries should be
in /usr/lib64.

The files you found are in /usr/lib, which are normally 32-bit.  Either you
have the 32-bit libraries installed by accident or the 64-bit libraries are
installed in the wrong place (broken rpm?).

__Martin

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by 

Make an app they can't live without
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users