rclark@speclab.bgp-usgs.gov (Roger N. Clark) (10/07/89)
I just completed an upgrade from 2.1 to 3.1 on an HP 9000 sewries 825.
There were a number of problems.
It started with the LANLINK fileset: it wasn't on the update tape!
LANLINK contains files such as ifconfig, so without it,
no networking!
Thanks to Hal Shearer, I got the fileset via uucp (2.7
megabytes, 7 hours at 1200 baud; at least it was
quick compared to us mail or even fed express).
Because this fileset was missing, I started checking for others.
Appendix D of the installation manual lists the filesets. But I
find inconsistencies, so I can't figure out if I got everything.
For example, I don't have:
AC (C compiler and library)...but I can compile C progs,
but are they 3.1?
EX_UTIL (Important utilities)
EX_MAN (man pages for above utilities)
EX_TEXT (text processing commands)
EX_APPLIC (important applications)
with X-windows, it lists:
X11WIN, X11WINP, X11WINM, X11WINC, X11WINSA, X11WINSB
but I got: X11WINP, X11WINM and two not in the above list: X11WINE, X11WINS
What about X11WIN, X11WINC, X11WINSA, X11WINSB ????????????????
I also have a 32 user license, but I didn't get 32_USER
How do I check if I have 32 users or not?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I checked some files within the filesets and found that the names of
some filesets have changed between 2.1 and 3.1:
2.1 name 3.1 name
SHERLOCK DIAG
AUXCORE SW_DEV
MANPAGES AMANUAL
HPUXCORE ACORE
HPUXKERN APROG
Are the fileset names changed, or are there internal differences?
So I have no Idea if other stuff is missing.
In the install, the gen failed because libraries from LANLINK
weren't there.
Second, the line "include atalk" was forgotten (I see it now in the 3.1
read me first (page 1-9), but there it only says to add it if you are
NOT using the customize scripts and doing a gen manually). Since I was
doing an update with the customize scripts, I paid no attention to that
part of the read me first document. Besides, during update, the
customize scripts even said they were working on the S800 file, one of
them should have added the atalk line. There was also discussion in the
read me first about uncommenting other include lines if you do it
manually "instead of using the customize script". Well the customize
script doesn't do it.
Fortunately, the response center quickly diagnosed the problem of
both the missing fileset and the include line...thanks Mike
Mahoney (spelling?).
Now that the system is up, most things I've tried seem to work. I can't find
anything missing (up a couple of hours).
However, sendmail didn't come up, and there is no error message. In
/etc/netbsdsrc, the sendmail startup looks like:
if ll /usr/lib/sendmail | grep '\-..[xs].....[tx]' > /dev/null 2>&1
then
/bin/rm -f /usr/spool/mqueue/[lnx]f*
/bin/echo "#### rebooted at `date` ####" >> /usr/spool/mqueue/syslog
/usr/lib/sendmail -bd -q30m && /bin/echo "sendmail \c"
fi
but the sendmail permissions are:
-r-sr-x--T 3 root mail 208896 Oct 5 12:18 /usr/lib/sendmail
so I changed netbsdsrc to:
if ll /usr/lib/sendmail | grep '\-r-sr-x--T' > /dev/null 2>&1
then
/bin/rm -f /usr/spool/mqueue/[lnx]f*
/bin/echo "#### rebooted at `date` ####" >> /usr/spool/mqueue/syslog
/usr/lib/sendmail -bd -q30m && /bin/echo "sendmail \c"
else
/bin/echo "WARNING: /usr/bin/sendmail has the wrong permissions"
/bin/echo "WARNING: sendmail not started"
fi
QUESTION: What are the correct permissions for sendmail?
Considering the previous discussions on HPUX 3.1, security, and file
permissions, are there other files that need permissions changed?
So what's new in 3.1 from 2.1?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hey no problem. Just check /etc/newconfig/Update_info
Well I did, and the directory is EMPTY!
^^^^^
So what's new?
I usually wait a while before installing an update, to see if any
bugs are reported/fixed. Have others had these problems? If so, why
weren't there any notifications of these problems? (Response center
(Mike) said others have been bitten by the include atalk problem.)
I skipped 3.0. In general I skip any x.0 update as the chance for
bugs is usually greater (I guess I've been burned too many times, on
various manufacturers machines). Could skipping 3.0 have caused
some of these problems? The documentation said I could update to
3.1 from 2.1.
Roger N. Clark
..!speclab!rclarkshankar@hpclscu.HP.COM (Shankar Unni) (10/13/89)
> I skipped 3.0. In general I skip any x.0 update as the chance for > bugs is usually greater (I guess I've been burned too many times, on > various manufacturers machines). Could skipping 3.0 have caused > some of these problems? The documentation said I could update to > 3.1 from 2.1. I am not privy to any of the system integration stuff, so I can only sympathize with you (*very strongly*) on your many problems (the only suggestion that I can make is that you complain very loudly to your SE). However, I want to make a comment on that last statement: Not all releases will have a x.1 release. The ".1" releases are, in general, placeholder releases between major releases, and are not to be considered as "bug-fix-only" updates to the x.0 releases (sometimes, they contain new functionality). Each release is first shipped out in a controlled release, and if any critical problems are found, are fixed immediately *in that release*. A little while later, the tapes are sent out for general release. The SE's usually have the most recent update to the most recent release. ----- Shankar Unni E-Mail: Hewlett-Packard California Language Lab. Internet: shankar@hpda.hp.com Phone : (408) 447-5797 UUCP: ...!hplabs!hpda!shankar