| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Which Linux Distro Better For Firebird 1.5.x |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2004-10-20T05:05:34Z |
At 08:45 AM 20/10/2004 +0530, you wrote:
pcChips m/board. Eventually I gave up and put Mandrake 8, and later, 9.1
on that box and there have been no problems.
I have Firebird 1.5 running on RedHat 8 on another box, no problems
whatsoever. Your customer should be good to go with the RH 8 box, but Fb
1.5 won't install on lower versions of RedHat. I guess you have been using
RH 7.2 with Fb 1.0.
around (source only) that was done a long time ago by someone. It was said
to be buggy, though I've never found a binary that I could test. Perhaps
you could Google for FreeUDFLib and see whether you can find a
FreeUDFLib.so around.
I've been meaning to give it a burl, compiling the FreeUDFLib Pascal
sources in Kylix 3. If I have any measure of success, I'll post a message
and make the library available for download somewhere.
containing which version of glibc that contains the usable C++ runtime
library. Consult the Fb 1.5 release notes to get the details (see Linux
Compatibility). If you are using Fb 1.0, the problem doesn't exist,
because it's all C.
./heLen
>Dear Friends,I also had problems getting Suse 8.2 to install, on an AMD Duron 850,
>
>Till Date we have been using Firebird on
>W9x (For Development) and Suse 7.2 -> 8.2 (Production)
>
>Recently one of our Prospectives (who is keen on having
>Linux based FB as DB Server) H/W vendor has indicated
>his inability in Installing/Supporting Suse but he can
>Install/Support RH on his server. Till date we don't have
>any experience with RH installation or supporting FB on
>RH server.
>
>Can somebody guide us whether is it advisable to have
>RH 8.0 on Server or shall we insist on Suse 8.2 which
>has prooven record.
pcChips m/board. Eventually I gave up and put Mandrake 8, and later, 9.1
on that box and there have been no problems.
I have Firebird 1.5 running on RedHat 8 on another box, no problems
whatsoever. Your customer should be good to go with the RH 8 box, but Fb
1.5 won't install on lower versions of RedHat. I guess you have been using
RH 7.2 with Fb 1.0.
>Similarly we are using FreeUDFLibNo RPMs and a bit of a grey area for you, I think. There is a FreeUDFLibC
>UDFs. How shall we compile same on RH what are the
>RPMs required for that.
around (source only) that was done a long time ago by someone. It was said
to be buggy, though I've never found a binary that I could test. Perhaps
you could Google for FreeUDFLib and see whether you can find a
FreeUDFLib.so around.
I've been meaning to give it a burl, compiling the FreeUDFLib Pascal
sources in Kylix 3. If I have any measure of success, I'll post a message
and make the library available for download somewhere.
>BTW which distro has been in use for development andThe question in general is not which distro, so much as which distro
>testing of FB. If it is RH then I feel there will not be
>any problems in shifting from Suse to RH.
containing which version of glibc that contains the usable C++ runtime
library. Consult the Fb 1.5 release notes to get the details (see Linux
Compatibility). If you are using Fb 1.0, the problem doesn't exist,
because it's all C.
./heLen