Re: rhn_register failure

["'Bryce'" <bryce redhat com>]

'Bryce' wrote:

> Rich Payne wrote:
>
> > > also 7.1 on two up2000's (2x ev67 667, ev67 667)... up2date seems to
> > > work fine also on a DS10 (ev6 466) up2date seems to work fine I've
> > > also got an sx164 (ev56 533)... up2date also appears to work fine
> >
> > SX is actually pca56.
>
> ok ok 8) mr pedantic 8)
>
> > > fly in the ointment
> > > 7.1 (ev67 600) on a Nautilus,.. up2date flakes out.
> >
> > Wow....that's a strange one.....this is exactly the same chip as used in
> > the UP2000s above, only difference would be the cache size (4mb vs 2mb for
> > nautilus).
>
> > Could this be a glibc difference? One is running the normal glibc, the
> > other is running the ev6 version? Thought that wouldn't explain the
> > original post as he was on a PWS600au (aka ev56).
>
> Well the Nautilus and the ds10 and the up2000's are all running with an ev6
> version
> -rwxr-xr-x    2 root     root      9881323 Jun  6 14:27 /lib/libc-2.2.3.so
>
> wheras the sx164 is running with the normal non ev6 lib
> -rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root      9933148 Jun  6 13:33 /lib/libc-2.2.3.so
>
> Hummmm
> you could try forcefully installing the non ev6 libc and see if that helps.
> There might be a minor slowdown, however, in realistic use, it's not likely
> you'd notice
> the differance.
>
> Phil
> =--=

Actually don't bother, I just tried that with the Nautilus and it didn't make a

blind bit of differance.

Phil
=--=