RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Installing Tivoli Storage Manager Client on Linux x86_64 Hosts

Are you trying to install the IBM Tivoli Storage Manager client on your 64-bit Red Hat Enterprise Linux box?

Are you getting an error like:

error: Failed dependencies:
libstdc++.so.5()(64bit) is needed by TIVsm-API64-5.4.0-0.x86_64
libstdc++.so.5(CXXABI_1.2)(64bit) is needed by TIVsm-API64-5.4.0-0.x86_64
libstdc++.so.5(GLIBCPP_3.2)(64bit) is needed by TIVsm-API64-5.4.0-0.x86_64
libstdc++.so.5 is needed by TIVsm-API-5.4.0-0.i386
libstdc++.so.5(CXXABI_1.2) is needed by TIVsm-API-5.4.0-0.i386
libstdc++.so.5(GLIBCPP_3.2) is needed by TIVsm-API-5.4.0-0.i386
libstdc++.so.5(GLIBCPP_3.2.2) is needed by TIVsm-API-5.4.0-0.i386

Do you already have compat-libstdc++-33 installed?

Yeah, I did, too. Turns out you need the 32-bit compat-libstdc++-33 package. Get it with:

up2date compat-libstdc++-33 --arch=i386

If this is mentioned anywhere I didn’t find it.

You might end up with both 32- and 64-bit versions of that package. You can get rid of them all if you need to with:

rpm --erase --allmatches compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-47.3

| Comments

Trackback URL

  1. 4 Comment(s)

  2. By nickyP on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply

    The 32 and 64-bit library stuff can be a pain in the ass ;-)

    A little rpm query if you want to do rpm -qa to show those ‘duplicate’ libs:

    rpm -qa --queryformat='%{n}-%{v}-%{r}.%{arch}\n'

    You could set that query-format as default in your .rpmmacros I guess

  3. By Jesse on Feb 22, 2007 | Reply

    aol. I wasted an afternoon a few weeks months ago wondering why emulex hbanyware wouldn’t install on my x86_64 servers, same deal only with xorg-x11-libs >:

  4. By John Fulton on Feb 11, 2008 | Reply

    Thank you! That helped me a lot.

  5. By Rob on Jun 9, 2008 | Reply

    Thanks for the answer to the original library issue.

Post a Comment

 

Please note that while in principle I don't mind promotion of a non-personal web site or blog in the fields below, any comments that are off-topic, derogatory, or spam-like will likely be removed at my discretion.