startup fail after install on Ubuntu 11.04

[lewinb]

My rig is running 64-bit ubuntu 2 dual-core Xeons.
I have been running FAH6.34-Linux64 via terminal. It works fine. I installed it because I couldn't get the v7 installer to work properly, using the installer package. I'm still trying to get v7 to work. Here is what happens when I try to install manually:

Selecting previously deselected package fahclient.
(Reading database ... 167534 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking fahclient (from fahclient_7.1.52_amd64.deb) ...
usermod: no changes
Setting up fahclient (7.1.52) ...
Adding system startup for /etc/init.d/FAHClient ...
/etc/rc0.d/K20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc1.d/K20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc6.d/K20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc2.d/S20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc3.d/S20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc4.d/S20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
/etc/rc5.d/S20FAHClient -> ../init.d/FAHClient
Starting fahclient. . .FAIL
invoke-rc.d: initscript FAHClient, action "start" failed.
Processing triggers for ureadahead ...
lewinb@Xeon:~/folding$

This is what I get when I just try to run FAHClient:

lewinb@Xeon:~/folding$ FAHClient
FAHClient: error while loading shared libraries: libssl.so.1.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
lewinb@Xeon:~/folding$

But I have other things installed that use ssl... and shouldn't dpkg have picked that up, as a dependency?

This is the log for dpkg, starting with removal of the previous (non-working) v7 install:

2012-04-11 21:17:13 startup packages remove
2012-04-11 21:17:13 status installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:16 remove fahclient 7.1.52 <none>
2012-04-11 21:17:16 status half-configured fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:16 status half-installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:16 status triggers-pending ureadahead 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:17:16 status half-installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:19 status config-files fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:19 status config-files fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:17:19 trigproc ureadahead 0.100.0-11 <none>
2012-04-11 21:17:19 status half-configured ureadahead 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:17:19 status installed ureadahead 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:25:51 startup archives install
2012-04-11 21:25:54 install fahclient 7.1.52 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status half-installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status triggers-pending ureadahead 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status half-installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status unpacked fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status unpacked fahclient 7.1.52

2012-04-11 21:25:54 configure fahclient 7.1.52 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status unpacked fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status unpacked fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:54 status half-configured fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:56 status triggers-awaited fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:56 trigproc ureadahead 0.100.0-11 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:25:56 status half-configured ureadahead 0.100.0-11
2012-04-11 21:25:56 status installed fahclient 7.1.52
2012-04-11 21:25:56 status installed ureadahead 0.100.0-11

At this point I don't know where else to look for a reason, as to why it is failing. Am I correct in my understanding that "amd64" is used nowadays for *all* 64-bit processors, not just amd? I noted that the v.34 version that worked was not labeled "linux64".

[7im]

Try the FAH Linux Install Guide, in the manual install section, where it also shows how to ignore the dependencies...

[lewinb]

I've read the help file for dpkg, and as far as I can tell, setting --force-depends tells it to "Turn all dependency problems into warnings" rather than stopping. Do I have that wrong? And according to the manual, "Note: The installation commands shown include options to continue even when exact dependencies are not met. " I actually did follow the guide you referenced, using the exact commands given.

What can I try next?

[smoking2000]

You're completely right regarding dpkg, see also my comments in New official V7 installation/configuration guides

You need to install libssl1.0.0 manually, it's the only package to satisfy the dependency. But libssl1.0.0 is not available in Ubuntu 11.04, it was introduced in Ubuntu 11.10. So you can't run the new v7.1.52 FAHClient on Ubuntu 11.04.

You can run FAHClient v7.1.50 which was build with libssl0.9.8 and works on most Linux distributions. Or upgrade your Ubuntu to 11.10 or newer to get openssl 1.0.0, so you can run FAHClient v7.1.52.

[lewinb]

Ok, I used "Ubuntu Software Center" to uninstall 7.1.52. I then downloaded and attempted to install 7.1.50, as suggested. ... still no joy.
Here's what happened:

lewinb@Xeon:~/folding7$ sudo dpkg -i --force-depends fahclient_7.1.50_amd64.deb
[sudo] password for lewinb:
dpkg: warning: downgrading fahclient from 7.1.52 to 7.1.50.
(Reading database ... 167544 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace fahclient 7.1.52 (using fahclient_7.1.50_amd64.deb) ...
usermod: no changes
Unpacking replacement fahclient ...
Setting up fahclient (7.1.50) ...
System start/stop links for /etc/init.d/FAHClient already exist.
Starting fahclient. . .FAIL
invoke-rc.d: initscript FAHClient, action "start" failed.
Processing triggers for ureadahead ...
lewinb@Xeon:~/folding7$

I find it a little odd that it still indicated it was replacing something, even though I had already uninstalled. is there a more complete/effective means, for my purposes?

I did verify that I have libssl.so.0.9.8 in lib and usr/lib

This seems to indicate that libssl 1.0.0 is required even for 7.1.50:

lewinb@Xeon:~/folding7$ FAHClient
FAHClient: error while loading shared libraries: libssl.so.1.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
lewinb@Xeon:~/folding7$

What should I try next?

[7im]

sudo dpkg -P fahclient
sudo dpkg -P fahcontrol

-P for purge

Then install V7.1.50 again.


Is an upgrade to Ubuntu 11.10 out of the question?

[lewinb]

In the meantime, I found the page where previous versions of the beta are linked.
I worked backword to 7.1.48 ... it installed and started successfully.

Is there significant enough difference in performance between 7.1.48 and 7.1.50 to warrant messing with it further? Are you certain that 7.1.50 only needs libSSL 0.9.8 ?

Is it possible that some of these tips (ie, to purge rather than uninstall) could be included directly in the actual guide? Or that the client could say *why* it fails to start, instead of just reporting "FAIL" as shown above?

Or perhaps the package could could manipulated so that when it's uninstalled via the gui, it actually totally uninstalls?

[7im]

-P to uninstall is in the guide. See the uninstall/upgrade section at the bottom.

The rest of those requests are good suggestions but are almost entirely operating system dependent. Look how complicated just installing a working version was...

[jzoomer]

Where do you find the previous versions like 7.1.48?

It seems like if you are going to have versions that only work with certian linux flavors, you will need an active archive users can get to. Upgrading OS version just for fah does not seem like a useful idea to me.

[bollix47]

Where do you find the previous versions like 7.1.48?

Access to previous releases can be found near the bottom of the following page:

https://fah-web.stanford.edu/projects/F ... etaRelease

[7im]

It seems like if you are going to have versions that only work with certian linux flavors, you will need an active archive users can get to. Upgrading OS version just for fah does not seem like a useful idea to me.

The goal was to not have versions of fah that only work with certain flavors or versions of Linux. It just turned out that way, for now... and for now, the options are upgrade linux or downgrade fah. (not really a downgrade!)