Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, David McBride wrote:
>
>
>>It's good to know that later versions won't have these architecture
>>issues, but that doesn't solve my immediate problem. (I need to get our
>>local site up and running in production as soon as possible.)
>>
>>Is the 64-bit port available for me to test?
>
>
> If you mean the MON box, we had trouble with this in 2.4.0 as R-GMA
> shifted to using python 2.x, which wasn't the default python on RH7.3.
>
> I don't know if they'll still apply to 2.6.0, but the solution is still on
> the GOC Wiki at
> http://goc.grid.sinica.edu.tw/gocwiki/Python_version_problem
>
> I don't know if that could be adapted to use whichever python you have
> working?
Hi Henry,
Thanks for the pointer, but the problem is not with the _version_ of
Python that we have installed (we're using RHEL 3, which uses python
2.something by default) but rather with a mismatch between the
compilation options used for a) the python interpreter itself and b) a
pre-compiled binary .so library provided by LCG.
In this particular case the mis-match results in binary incompatible
files which simply cannot be linked together at runtime.
As I'd rather not need to install another python interpreter and fudge
the environment of everything that might need to use this particular
library, I was hoping that a 64-bit version of this .so file might be
available..
Cheers,
David
--
David McBride <[log in to unmask]>
Department of Computing, Imperial College, London
|