[McIDAS #RDR-211897]: Mcidas build on Fedora 16

Hi Bill,

re:
> Thank you Tom.  I'm always amazed at my lack of intuition on Fedora, yum, and 
> gnu.  I
> thought I had c++ installed.  Foolish me.

Installing c++ is something that came along with newer versions of 
Fedora/CentOS/Redhat
Enterprise.  I too had to learn this the hard way mainly because McIDAS does 
_not_
have any C++ code in it, so why should C++ have to be installed!?  The reason 
is so
that there is a working version of 'cpp'.  Argh!!

re:
> Well, after getting numerous additional gnu
> packages and X extensions, I got a clean compile.

Excellent.  Did the list of packages that I installed for Fedora 14 and/or
CentOS 6.2 help at all?

re:
> Typing 'mcidas' though brings up a
> problem...about which I got some info from your old support emails online.  
> Still,
> though, I'm stumped on this one, so here's the requisite info:
> 
> 
> [mcidas@localhost bin]$ mcidas
> mcwish: error while loading shared libraries: libtk8.5.so: cannot open shared 
> object
> file: No such file or directory

This is weird because the version of TclTk that is bundled with McIDAS should
be used.

Request:

- please send me the entire McIDAS make log file 
(~mcidas/mcidas2009/src/makelog)

  I want to verify/refute that the appropriate flag was set in the link of
  mcwish.  The flag that needs to be there is the one that "burns" the location
  of the Tcl and Tk libraries into the 'mcwish' executable.  Evidently, this
  was not set for some reason.

re:
> --so I read up on this and:
> [mcidas@localhost src]$ ldd mcwish
> linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xb771f000)
> libtk8.5.so => not found
> libtcl8.5.so => /usr/lib/libtcl8.5.so (0x49693000)
> libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x49a4e000)
> libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x49653000)
> libgfortran.so.3 => /usr/lib/libgfortran.so.3 (0xb7609000)
> libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x49666000)
> libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0xb75ec000)
> libquadmath.so.0 => /usr/lib/libquadmath.so.0 (0xb7579000)
> libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x49486000)
> libxcb.so.1 => /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0x49a29000)
> /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x49461000)
> libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXau.so.6 (0x49a49000)

The versions of the Tcl and Tk libraries used should be the ones installed
in ~mcidas/tcl/lib.  Here is the 'ldd' output for 'mcwish' built in my
CentOS 6.2 v8x6_64 virtual machine (the environment I always run in anymore):

% ldd mcwish
        linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x00007fffeeeb8000)
        libtk8.5.so => /home/mcidas/tcl/lib/libtk8.5.so (0x00007f81f3a5f000)
        libtcl8.5.so => /home/mcidas/tcl/lib/libtcl8.5.so (0x00007f81f3751000)
        libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libX11.so.6 (0x0000003289c00000)
        libdl.so.2 => /lib64/libdl.so.2 (0x0000003287000000)
        libgfortran.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libgfortran.so.3 (0x00007f81f3451000)
        libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x0000003287800000)
        libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x0000003292c00000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x0000003286c00000)
        libxcb.so.1 => /usr/lib64/libxcb.so.1 (0x000000328a800000)
        /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x0000003286800000)
        libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libXau.so.6 (0x000000328a000000)

re:
> ---so then we look around:
> [mcidas@localhost ~]$ find -name "libtk*" -print
> ./mcidas2009/tk/unix/libtkstub8.5.a
> ./mcidas2009/tk/unix/libtk8.5.so
> ./tcl/lib/libtkstub8.5.a
> ./tcl/lib/libtk8.5.so
> [mcidas@localhost ~]$

What does 'locate' say?  I run this:

% locate libtk
/home/mcidas/mcidas2009/tk/unix/libtk8.5.so
/home/mcidas/mcidas2009/tk/unix/libtkstub8.5.a
/home/mcidas/tcl/lib/libtk8.5.so
/home/mcidas/tcl/lib/libtkstub8.5.a
/opt/libreoffice3.5/program/libtklo.so

If libtk8.5.so does not exist in /home/mcidas/tcl/lib, then the
installation may not be complete.  If you ran 'make install' to
install McIDAS (like you should), it would mean that I mucked up
something in the installation.  At this point, I would recommend
that you run 'make install.all', and then rerun 'ldd' to see if
the reference to the Tk library is satisfied.

e:
> --and check the paths
> [mcidas@localhost ~]$ env |grep MC
> MCHOME=/home/mcidas
> MCCOMPRESS=GZIP
> MCTABLE_WRITE=/home/mcidas/data/ADDESITE.TXT
> MCDATA=/home/mcidas/workdata
> MCTABLE_READ=/home/mcidas/workdata/MCTABLE.TXT;/home/mcidas/data/ADDESITE.TXT
> MCGUI=/home/mcidas/bin
> MCPATH=/home/mcidas/workdata:/home/mcidas/workdata:/home/mcidas/data:/home/mcidas/help
> [mcidas@localhost ~]$ echo $PATH
> /home/mcidas/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/home/mcidas/.local/bin:/home/mcidas/bin
> 
> I'm guessing that I have a path screwed up, but they look correct (enough) to 
> me based
> on the docs.

You did not mess anything up; everything above is as it should be.

e:
> On the other topic you mentioned: thanks for the recommendation on CentOs.  I 
> may give
> it a try.  I've come to detest Fedora with a hate normally reserved for 
> Microsoft.

:-)

re:
> They
> give 'bleeding edge' a new meaning in the computer world.

I totally agree.  The reason I went to CentOS is that it is still RedHat Linux,
but it is the Enterprise version, and it like RedHat Enterprise does _not_
change rapidly like Fedora (Fedora is the developer branch of RedHat releases).

re:
> After last WEEK's install of
> 16 and then experiencing Gnome 3,  it was on my list to go to a different 
> unix.

I must say that I REALLY do not like Gnome 3!  I even switched to KDE in my
Fedora 15 installation, but I really don't like KDE either.  CentOS 6.2 still
has Gnome 2 which I really like/am totally comfortable in.

re:
> I was
> researching the easiest, most stupid-friendly, since I pretty much just do my 
> own thing
> now. I could get along well without it except for Mcidas.  And Fedora 13 had 
> some bugs
> in the desktop that got in my way, thus the upgrade to 16.

Interesting. What were the bugs in the Fedora 13 desktop that you ran into?  I 
used
Fedora 13 for a long time (as a VMware virtual machine), and did not run into 
anything
bad.  I upgraded to Fedora 14 to keep up with security patches.  The upgrade to 
Fedora
15 was for the same reason.  I was going to install Fedora 16, but I got tired 
of
configuring a new OS virtual machine every year/year and a half.  I went to the
VMware site and found someone that was offering a 64-bit CentOS version for 
$0.99.
Since my previous virtual machines had been 32-bit, I jumped at the 64-bit VM.

re:
> Ubuntu was going to be my
> choice.  Any recommendations there between the 2, for a guy who just wants a 
> stable
> system?

I have run Ubuntu as a VM in the past.  I keep promising myself that I will try
a current version someday, but I have been so happy with my CentOS 64-bit VM 
that
I find it hard to motivate myself to do the installation.

Comment:

- Ubuntu is a Debian derivative, not a RedHat one

  This means that the package management system is totally different from the
  one you are used to using (i.e., no RPMs, no 'yum').  Since I have gotten
  very comfortable with RPMs and 'yum', I find that I don't like the 
Debian/Ubuntu
  way of doing things

- I have helped more than one use get rolling with Ubuntu for our NOAAPort 
ingest
  package, ldm-mcidas, and McIDAS-X.  There is one hiccup under Ubuntu that took
  me a little bit to figure out -- I had to change the shell used in one of the
  McIDAS scripts from 'sh' to 'bash'.  I remain surprised by this as 'sh' is
  a link to 'bash'.  I guess the behavior that the 'sh' invocation of 'bash'
  under Ubuntu exhibits is not quite right.

My recommendation?  I say CentOS 6.2.  The reasons?

- the environment will be completely familiar

- lots of folks in the Unidata community have migrated to CentOS (there is
  another contingent that is now using Scientific Linux which is also
  a RedHat derivative)

- CentOS packages are kept up to date

  For example, I am running the absolute current versions of Firefox and
  Thunderbird in my CentOS 6.2 VM, and I did not have to go out and
  download RPMs to make this happen; the 'yum' repositories are kept
  up to date.

  By the way, the VM I loaded was not CentOS 6.2; it was CentOS 6.1. The
  second or third automatic update upgraded my installation from 6.1 to
  6.2 automatically.

re:
> Thanks again, Tom.

No worries.  I think if you move to CentOS you will be a happier camper :-)

Cheers,

Tom
--
****************************************************************************
Unidata User Support                                    UCAR Unidata Program
(303) 497-8642                                                 P.O. Box 3000
address@hidden                                   Boulder, CO 80307
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unidata HomePage                       http://www.unidata.ucar.edu
****************************************************************************


Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: RDR-211897
Department: Support McIDAS
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed