Steven T. Hatton wrote:

> when I try to run the SSLClient.class found in the sample code found on 
> mozilla.org I get:
> 
> /***************************************************/
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: Unable to 
> load jss library or one of its dependencies at 
> org.mozilla.jss.CryptoManager.loadNativeLibraries(CryptoManager.java:1272)
> at org.mozilla.jss.CryptoManager.initialize(CryptoManager.java:756)
> at SSLClient.<init>(SSLClient.java:245)
> at SSLClient.main(SSLClient.java:324)
> bash-2.03$
> /****************************************************/
> 
> This is the environment information which I believe to be relevant to 
> the JSS-3.1.1:
> 
> /****************************************************/
> echo $LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> 
>/home/hattons/lib:/usr/local/kde/lib:/usr/local/qt/lib:/usr/lib:/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/nss/lib:/usr/local/nspr/lib:/usr/local/jss/lib:/usr/openwin/lib
> 
> 
> 
> bash-2.03$ ls -l /usr/local/jss/lib
> total 248
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other      239192 Nov 14 13:45 libjss3.so
> bash-2.03$
> 
> bash-2.03$ ls -l /usr/local/nss/lib
> total 2056
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other     1084088 Nov  8 22:36 libnss3.so
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other      450056 Nov  8 22:36 libnssckbi.so
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other      302176 Nov  8 22:36 libsmime3.so
> -rwxr-xr-x   1 root     other      225608 Nov  8 22:36 libssl3.so


You are missing two .so's for 32-bit Solaris SPARC.

libfreebl_pure32_3.so
libfreebl_hybrid_3.so

These need to be installed in the same directory as
libnss3.so on 32-bit Solaris SPARC.

See "Support for ILP32" in
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/intro.html
and "Migration from NSS 3.1.1" in the NSS 3.2 Release Notes
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/release_notes_32.html.

By the way, you also need to install the libnssckbi.so in

your NSS config directory (where your cert7.db, key3.db,
and secmod.db are).


> I attempted to use the command line tools provided with the NSS-3.3.1, 
> but they do not function as described in the documentation.  They don't 
> even seem to be close to what is described in the documentation.


This would be a serious problem.  Please help us find out if our
documentation is incorrect or there is some problem in your setup.


> I'm srue this is a wonderful suite of tools, but without better 
> documentation, it is unusable.


This is true.  We don't have a technical writer now, so we can
only do spot fixes or improvements as opposed to adding major
new docs.  If you find any problem in our documentation, please
let us know and we will fix it.

Thanks,
Wan-Teh


Reply via email to