From: Pritchard, Hugh \(CSED\) (Hugh.Pritchard@dc.gov)
Date: Thu Oct 16 2003 - 14:35:09 EDT
Tom Blinn, within seconds, pointed out that I could use /sbin/mv to restore
libc.so, without kicking everybody off the system, going to single-user
level, or any dramatic like that. Thanks.
Hugh
_______________________________________________________________________
Hugh Pritchard (Tier), 202-546-3066, cell 301-467-1712
D.C. Ofc of Corporation Counsel, Child Support Enforcement Division
650 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Suite 250, Washington, DC 20003
mailto:Hugh.Pritchard@DC.gov
| -----Original Message-----
| From: tru64-unix-managers-owner@ornl.gov
| [mailto:tru64-unix-managers-owner@ornl.gov]On Behalf Of Pritchard, Hugh
(CSED)
| Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 12:42 PM
| To: 'tru64-unix-managers@ornl.gov'
| Subject: Restoring libc.so when any cmd gets "/sbin/loader: Fatal Error:
cannot map libc.so"
| Importance: High
|
| I was trying to substitute a vendor's (Veridis, of Belgium)
| libc.so for the standard libc.so.
| Immediately after I mv'ed /shlib/libc.so to libc.so-orig, all
| commands (such as mv and ln) stopped working,
| with the error "/sbin/loader: Fatal Error: cannot map
| libc.so". People cannot login to the system (telnetd has stopped
working).
| People already
| logged on and in our database application (UniVerse) have noticed
| nothing--they seem to be able to give "commands" to the application.
|
| Is there a way to restore (move back, etc.) libc.so? Can I
| do this without going to single-user level?
| If I do have to go to single-user level, is it simply a
| matter of moving
| back the original--do the commands under /sbin insist on
| seeing the shared
| library libc.so (I thought those executables were linked already)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Apr 12 2008 - 10:49:39 EDT