I'm not sure what error log you're referring to. As I said, the vendor daemon builds without problem. The problem is when I try to run it on our license server: $ file pragmad pragmad: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped $ ldd pragmad /usr/bin/ldd: line 1: ./pragmad: No such file or directory $ ./pragmad -bash: ./pragmad: No such file or directory But again, I know how to fix that: the OS on our license server is an antique Suse Enterprise Linux that we could upgrade to make it compatible with the lsb-core package. The problem is with our customers: asking them to install a new vendor daemon is something; asking them to install the lsb-core package because our vendor daemon doesn't run without it is another, and we'd really prefer not having to do that. ... View more

Hello and thanks a lot for your answers, I did install the package named lsb-core on my Ubuntu 16.04.5 32 bits machine, and I could build the vendor daemon without problem. But now I have another problem: the generated vendor daemon executable does not work on our server machine. When I'm trying to run it, it just prints a message "No such file or directory" and doesn't run at all. And the version of Linux installed on this machine is quite old, and I have no clue about how to install this lsb_core package on it. Now we could upgrade our system, but what if a customer have the same problem? We just can't ask them to upgrade a whole machine just to be able to run a FlexNet vendor daemon… Is there any way to build a vendor daemon that does not need the lsb_core package installed? Thanks again. - Eric - ... View more

Hello Abhay, and thanks again for your answer, Aparashar wrote: Error "-5" is LM_NOFEATURE . It seems either the feature you are requesting is not being served by the server. Can you check again? I did check, and not only the feature appears in the license file on the server, but Linux 32 bits clients using the client library built with the licensing toolkit v11.5 are able to connect to the server without any problem and to check-out the license. Aparashar wrote: If a TRL-enabled application attempts either to communicate with a non-TRL vendor daemon or to authenticate a non-TRL license, an error message is displayed and the application does not run. The error message informs you that either the license file and/or the vendor daemon is not TRL compliant. That is what I suspected indeed, thanks for confirming it. Though there are still things I can't understand: The error message doesn't say anything about TRL, so it seems to be some other kind of issue that prevents the client from checking out a license. The full message says "No such file or directory", but I don't have any clue about what file or directory is missing. Is there any way to figure that out? I redid the whole build explicitely disabling TRL: I set both TRL keys to 0x0, used the exact same LM_SEEDs than in v11.5 and the same LM_STRENGTH, i.e LM_STRENGTH_DEFAULT. So now, I basically have the same contents of lm_code.h in v11.16 than in v11.5, except for the VENDOR_KEYs, that have changed. I thought that by doing that, I would turn TRL off and that my client would be able to connect to the existing servers. But it doesn't help, I'm getting the same error message. Aparashar wrote: In document "FNP_Programming Referance for License File based Licensing.pdf", the chapter -9 " License Signature Configurations" talks in details about it. Please refer to Table-9.1 and the following details (Added the document library with this chat page). It should help, if not just revert back. I looked in that document, but my configuration is not even listed in the table: I have ENCRYPTION_SEEDs set, LM_SEEDs set, TRL_KEYs not set and LM_STRENGTH to DEFAULT. So this looks like Config 1, but with ENCRYPTION_SEEDs set. So is there any way that it can work? And what do you mean exactly by "revert back"? I tried to look for FlexNet Publisher v11.5 in the Release Archives on the Flexera website, but it seems it is not available anymore, and the versions before 11.12 don't seem to have a Linux 64 bits version anyway. Do I have more chances to make it work if I use v11.12? Thank you again. Regards. - Eric - ... View more

Hello Abhay and thanks a lot for your answer, I had indeed changed the value of LM_STRENGTH, which was LM_STRENGTH_DEFAULT in the former lm_code.h, and which I had set to LM_STRENGTH_163BIT in the new one since we had purchased TRL and it was advised to do so in Flexera's confirmation email. Besides, setting LM_STRENGTH to LM_STRENGTH_DEFAULT when TRL keys are specified made the default build fail. So I set back LM_STRENGTH to LM_STRENGTH_DEFAULT and rebuilt everything with the environment variable FLEXLM_NO_TRL set to 1. The build worked fine, with only a warning saying that TRL was purchased, but not enabled. Sadly, this didn't change the behavior in any way: I'm still getting an error -5,412 when I try to check out a license. There's something that made me wonder in your answer though: you say that with the same LM_SEEDs and LM_STRENTGH, a client built with the old keys should be able to communicate with a server built with the new keys. But I'm actually trying to do the opposite here: my Linux 64 bits client is built with the new keys, and I'd like it to be able to communicate with a server/vendor daemon built with the old keys, as there are servers already installed by customers. Is this supposed to work too? Thanks again. Regards. - Eric - ... View more