Mozilla-1.4.2 UP2DATEd thru Red Hat Alert

[Rick Stevens]

Chris A Czerwinski wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 16:47, Rick Stevens wrote:
> 
>>Chris A Czerwinski wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 15:51, Rick Stevens wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Chris A Czerwinski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 14:57, Rick Stevens wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Chris A Czerwinski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Thu, 2004-03-18 at 13:24, Rick Stevens wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Chris A Czerwinski wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have just finished Up2Date thru Red Hat Alert
>>>>>>>>>which upgraded my Mozilla to mozilla-1.4.2-0.9.0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have now lost my mozilla plugins e.g. flashplayer, libflashplayer.
>>>>>>>>>I think I have lost my java link - as I now get an Error
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>-------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>JavaScript Application
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>! Error-Unregistered OpenCube DHTML Effect - (www.opencube.com)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>-------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>What and How do I get them back?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Mozilla is installed in /usr/lib/mozilla-(version).  Plugins are
>>>>>>>>installed in the "/plugins" directory of that location.  To get your
>>>>>>>>plugins back, copy the stuff from the the previous version's /plugins
>>>>>>>>directory.  I can't tell you the exact name of the directory as I don't
>>>>>>>>know what the previous version of Mozilla was, but the command
>>>>>>>>"ls -ld /usr/lib/mozilla*" will show you the names involved.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Note that the previous version's java stuff is most likely a symbolic
>>>>>>>>link to the Java runtime interpreter.  Make the same link in the new
>>>>>>>>Mozilla's /plugins.  Do NOT copy that link (that'll put a copy of the
>>>>>>>>interpreter in /plugins which won't work right), but do the symlink
>>>>>>>>manually.  In my case, that's
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  # cd /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>>>>>>>  # ln -s 
>>>>>>>>/usr/local/j2sdk_nb/j2sdk1.4.2/jre/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so 
>>>>>>>>libjavaplugin_oji.so
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The other stuff is safe to copy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Copied the files to /usr/lob/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins
>>>>>>>and it shows up in Mozilla -> help -> Plugins            so that works
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>However I made the link in there also /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins 
>>>>>>>        when should have made it in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>so what is the command to remove the symbolic link from
>>>>>>>       /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins 
>>>>>>>and then I will reapply in 
>>>>>>>       /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well, generally /usr/lib/mozilla is a symbolic link to the current
>>>>>>version of Mozilla.  If you did the "ls -ld /usr/lib/mozilla*", you
>>>>>>may have seen this at the end of one of the lines:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>	/usr/lib/mozilla -> mozilla-1.4.2
>>>>>>
>>>>>>If so, you don't need to change anything as putting the link in
>>>>>>mozilla-1.4.2/plugins is the same thing as mozilla/plugins.  Symbolic
>>>>>>links are aliases, meaning that "/usr/lib/mozilla" is just another name
>>>>>>for "/usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mozilla is run as "/usr/lib/mozilla/mozilla", so having
>>>>>>"/usr/lib/mozilla" point at the current version makes it easy to upgrade
>>>>>>versions, but still be able to go back to a previous version if the new
>>>>>>one doesn't work.  This is done by installing in a new
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla-(version)" directory and changing the symbolic link.
>>>>>>If you don't like it, change the symbolic link back to the previous
>>>>>>version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>For example, here's what I have (cleaned up to fit the display):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[root at prophead root]# ls -ld /usr/lib/mozilla*
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla -> mozilla-1.6
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla-1.2.1
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla-1.4
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla-1.5
>>>>>>/usr/lib/mozilla-1.6
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, I have versions of Mozilla from 1.2.1 through 1.6, but the active
>>>>>>one is 1.6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Symbolic links are special files.  "rm" will delete them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>My system is presently using gcc-2.3.2 as shown:
>>>>>
>>>>>[root at redhat90 plugins]# ls /lib/libc-*
>>>>>/lib/libc-2.3.2.so
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess I am using the incorrect version and I need to point to "ns610" 
>>>>> /usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_03/jre/plugin/i386/ns610/libjavaplugin_oji.so
>>>>>
>>>>>so if I use the 
>>>>>
>>>>>[root at redhat90 plugins]# rm
>>>>>/usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_03/jre/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so
>>>>>
>>>>>rm: remove regular file
>>>>>`/usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_03/jre/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so'? 
>>>>>Will it delete the FILE "ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so"   or 
>>>>>or will Remove the Link to the file it's pointing to within the
>>>>>directory /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins?
>>>>
>>>>If you're in /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins, it should just delete
>>>>the symbolic link.  Can you do this:
>>>>
>>>>	# cd /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2/plugins
>>>>	# ls -l
>>>>
>>>>and send me the output before you do anything?
>>>
>>>
>>>Here it is...
>>>
>>>[chris at redhat90 plugins]$ ls -l
>>>total 1468
>>>root          856 Mar 18 12:35 flashplayer.xpt
>>>root      1470464 Mar 18 12:36 libflashplayer.so
>>>root           72 Mar 18 11:56 libjavaplugin_oji.so ->
>>>/usr/java/j2sdk1.4.2_03/jre/plugin/i386/ns610-gcc32/libjavaplugin_oji.so
>>>root        18808 Mar  8 15:32 libnullplugin.so
>>
>>Ok, you can:
>>
>>	# cd /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2
>>	# rm libjavaplugin_oji.so
>>
>>to delete the symlink.  But, as I said, you DON'T need to do this
>>if "ls -ld /usr/lib/mozilla*" shows something like:
>>
>>lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 Mar 17 17:01 /usr/lib/mozilla -> mozilla-1.4.2
>>
>>since /usr/lib/mozilla and /usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.2 are the same
>>directory.
> 
> 
> Hi Rick,
> 
> What about the libc-2.3.2 version that I'm using 
> [root at redhat90 plugins]# ls /lib/libc-*
> /lib/libc-2.3.2.so

That's not the issue.  Read on.

> I'm not using libc-3.2? (if there is such a thing?)

No, there's no "libc-3.2".  You _are_ running glibc6 (yes, the version
numbers are weird...trust me), and that's the current one.  You're fine.

> or am I missing something with the conventions? Does this not matter?

You're missing something.  Read on.

> Is there a difference between "ns610-gcc32" and "ns610"?

Yes, there is, but it's not the glibc version you need to worry about,
it's the gcc compiler.

If you do "gcc -v" and see "gcc version 3.2.2" in the last line, then
use the "ns610-gcc32" version.  If it comes back with "gcc version
2.96", then use the "ns610" version.

Red Hat switched from the 2.96-series of C compilers to the 3.2-series
with Red Hat 7.3 (I think).  There are a number of differences in
external linkages, variable placement, stack usage and other things
between them, hence the two different modules--one compliant with the
old 2.96 stuff and one compliant with the current 3.2 stuff.  Unless
you're running a partially upgraded Red Hat 7.2 or eariler system, use
the ns610-gcc32 version.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Senior Systems Engineer     rstevens at vitalstream.com -
- VitalStream, Inc.                       http://www.vitalstream.com -
-                                                                    -
- Grabel's Law: 2 is not equal to 3--not even for large values of 2. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------