Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)? - HP UX

This is a discussion on Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)? - HP UX ; Trying to install the DataProtector client (disk agent) on a Novell/SUSE Linux Enterprise Server9 (SLES9) SP2 client gave the error message: Unsupported architecture/OS type (Linux xyzz 2.6.5-7.201-smp #1 SMP Thu Aug 25 06:20:45 UTC 2005 x64_64 x86_64 x86_64) Can I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

  1. Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

    Trying to install the DataProtector client (disk agent) on a Novell/SUSE Linux
    Enterprise Server9 (SLES9) SP2 client gave the error message:

    Unsupported architecture/OS type
    (Linux xyzz 2.6.5-7.201-smp #1 SMP Thu Aug 25 06:20:45 UTC 2005 x64_64 x86_64
    x86_64)

    Can I convince DP to install the 32bit client (if no 64 bit client exists)?

    Regards,
    Ulrich

  2. Re: Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

    Ulrich Windl writes:

    > Can I convince DP to install the 32bit client (if no 64 bit client exists)?


    On redhat/x86_64, there is a little setarch utility which may help:

    SYNOPSIS
    setarch [ -3 ] program

    DESCRIPTION
    setarch This utility currently only affects the output of uname -m. For
    example, on an AMD64 system, running 'setarch i386 program' will cause
    'program' to see i686 (or other relevant arch) instead of x86_64 as
    machine type. On systems where it is supported, the -3 option specifies
    that processes should use a maximum of 3GB of address space.

    EXAMPLES
    setarch ppc32 rpmbuild --target=ppc --rebuild foo.src.rpm


    Cheers,
    --
    In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
    Remove /-nsp/ for email.

  3. Re: Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

    Thanks Paul for the hint, but unfortunately SLES9 does not have that feature.

    Regards,
    Ulrich

    Paul Pluzhnikov writes:

    > Ulrich Windl writes:
    >
    > > Can I convince DP to install the 32bit client (if no 64 bit client exists)?

    >
    > On redhat/x86_64, there is a little setarch utility which may help:
    >
    > SYNOPSIS
    > setarch [ -3 ] program
    >
    > DESCRIPTION
    > setarch This utility currently only affects the output of uname -m. For
    > example, on an AMD64 system, running 'setarch i386 program' will cause
    > 'program' to see i686 (or other relevant arch) instead of x86_64 as
    > machine type. On systems where it is supported, the -3 option specifies
    > that processes should use a maximum of 3GB of address space.
    >
    > EXAMPLES
    > setarch ppc32 rpmbuild --target=ppc --rebuild foo.src.rpm
    >
    >
    > Cheers,
    > --
    > In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
    > Remove /-nsp/ for email.


  4. Re: Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

    Ulrich Windl writes:

    Please do not top-post:
    http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html

    > Thanks Paul for the hint, but unfortunately SLES9 does not have that feature.


    You should be able to compile it from source:
    ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub...-1.8-1.src.rpm

    Cheers,
    --
    In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
    Remove /-nsp/ for email.

  5. Re: Data Protector v5.5 for Linux on x86_64 (Intel Xeon)?

    Paul Pluzhnikov writes:

    > Ulrich Windl writes:
    >
    > Please do not top-post:
    > http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
    >
    > > Thanks Paul for the hint, but unfortunately SLES9 does not have that feature.

    >
    > You should be able to compile it from source:
    > ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub...-1.8-1.src.rpm


    Hi!

    I chose a different solution: Patch PHSS_32842 did not help (although the
    support matrix dated 10.10.2005 said it's required). So I just copied the
    installation from a 32bit SUSE Linux machine and _imported_ the client
    (instead of installing). So far Data Protector is happy with that. Soon I'll
    now whether the scheduled backup will work. Stay tuned ;-)

    Regards,
    Ulrich

    >
    > Cheers,
    > --
    > In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
    > Remove /-nsp/ for email.


+ Reply to Thread