Dennis Clarke wrote:
At some point one must call it a night and realize that the problem is not
with pca nor wget or even some openssl linkage.
Connecting to getupdates.oracle.com|192.18.110.9|:443... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Service Error
2010-12-17 04:29:12 ERROR
Stuart F. Biggar wrote:
At about 7 AM MST (1400 GMT) OS downloads work for me but the new
Studio patch fails:
145357 01 02 --- 1 Oracle Solaris Studio 12.2_x86: Patch for Compiler Common
I expect that is because I don't have a compiler support agreement yet
even though I do have OS/machine
Michele Vecchiato wrote:
Ok, I'm a paranoid person ;-), but how does pca to verify that the patch
downloaded from Oracle site is not corrupt?
Simple answer - it doesn't. I have made experiments with JAR patches in the past
(which are cryptographically signed), but the procedures to verify the
Hi
There's a new development version (20101216-01) available on
http://www.par.univie.ac.at/solaris/pca/installation.html which uses an
alternative authentication mode. This one should fix the problems with some
combinations of web proxies and wget versions.
Finally, I got it to work using
Jones, Eric CIV SRF 1236 wrote:
After checking a few more I'm getting hits of 2 successful here, 4 on
another, 2 more somewhere else etc... But the patch numbers are not the
same.
It's hard to see what could be wrong then. When using the same MOS account and
PCA setup, it would be weird if a
Martin Paul wrote:
The reaons (or at least one reason) for differing checksums is that
Sun/Oracle sometimes changes a patch zip file's contents after first
publishing, like updating README files. As far as I know any functional
change would trigger a new revision.
A small addendum: I used
Gael Martinez wrote:
Quick question to the PCA list, with the jar format being discontinued, who
else is stuck with the profile entry not working ?
patch patch_order http://10.115.176.59/Images/10/1009/RC1/Patches/sparctimeout 5
Interesting. I didn't know that only JAR format is supported in
Nishimura, Scott L (IT Solutions) wrote:
Your co-worker probably has an email in his inbox outlining that you have
made a request to access that SID and what to do about it. I think it's a
first come, first served thing: my co-worker got to SID A before I did and
therefore, he claimed
pierre-yves.thill...@infineon.com wrote:
I may have missed some emails about this, but this morning I noticed that we
were having the 401 problem.
I had previously registered for an MOS account. Test downloads from Oracle
with our new account worked fine.
Have you tested both before and after
pierre-yves.thill...@infineon.com schrieb:
But with the simple wget command as given below this does not work:
I have a certain suspicion. To verify, could you please:
1. Run the same command, but use /usr/sfw/bin/wget (or any wget 1.11)
instead of /opt/csw/bin/wget
2. Run the original
pierre-yves.thill...@infineon.com schrieb:
Whaohyour suspicion was impressive...
With /usr/sfw/bin/wget it works ! and the same download with pca if I set the
wget variable to use /usr/sfw/bin/wget
Ok, thanks for the confirmation. It'd be nice to hear from others with
proxy
Laurent Blume wrote:
After discussing (in French) with Gérard, it seems his issue might be
that he's using the '=' character in his password.
We had a lot of conversation about it off-list, too, and at the end it suddenly
worked after he changed the password to a new one and later back to the
Thomas Roos wrote:
We still have problems patching, using the newest pca-version, see below. pca
gets 4 patches out of 55 and gives the same error for the rest: Failed
(Error 403: You are not entitled to retrieve this content.)
Same here. Even patches which I downloaded successfully a few
Diana Orrick schrieb:
Thanks for the suggestion,
Unfortunately the 1.12 wget requires libssl.0.9.8
which I cannot find without installing OpenSSL
separately from the Sun/Oracle supplied openssl.
Would prefer to stick with Sun supplied version
and the updates provided as needed...
It's fine
Mike Brown wrote:
The download server issues are under investigation. Some actions have been
put in place to alleviate the problems, but there still may be occasional
unanticipated failures. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Things look better here today. I successfully downloaded a
Nishimura, Scott L (IT Solutions) wrote:
Interestingly, I can download the readme of a patch but not the patch itself.
For example, 146283-01. As someone mentioned earlier, one difference between
success and failure was whether the query got redirected to akamai but
perhaps that is a symptom
Eric,
Please see the article from 2010/11/24 on PCA's news page:
http://www.par.univie.ac.at/solaris/pca/news.html
Until now the required changes for usage of the new Oracle download
service are only included in a development version of PCA, because there
was only a handful of patches
Martin Paul wrote:
Has anybody been successful in downloading a README file?
Obviously there was an error in the InfoDoc. A note has been added:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-79-1199543.1-1
18 November 2010:
* Corrected error in documentation for downloading
Don O'Malley wrote:
The new patch download service - getupdates.oracle.com - is now available for
testing.
I have completed the necessary changes to PCA to make it work with the
testing service of getupdates.oracle.com. The current development
release (20101119-01) includes these changes:
Hi little help,
1. From the pca website it states *As pca uses the wget command to
download patches from the patch server, make sure that any specially
required option is set in /etc/wgetrc or $HOME/.wgetrc*.. I see the
options to tell pca where wet resides but nothing to set the
Dennis Clarke wrote:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-21-124864-26-1
SunSolve Errors
You have encountered the following error(s) or warning(s):
* The document requested could not be found
Anyone seen this?
Yes, same here, it's still missing. You could try to use
Don O'Malley wrote:
These patches shoulb be available in the next couple of hours.
Thanks - all these patches plus the new ones from today downloaded and
installed fine now.
Martin.
Paul B. Henson wrote:
Sounds like it will either work fine or be broken depending on your
hardware. We've got X4500's with 1GB disks, has anybody had any problems
with U9 on that hardware platform?
I have an X4500 with 500GB disks, on which I installed 142910-17 when it
came out (Sep 07). On
Dennis Clarke wrote:
In any case the kernel rev on this machine was 118822-25 and pca says
there have been a few revs since then :
Oh yes, that's pretty old :)
The following requested patches will not be installed because
at least one required patch is not installed on this system.
Just FYI - once again, I have troubles downloading the new patches from
today's patchdiag.xref. Any attempt to download e.g. 144554-01,
144555-01, 144560-01 or 144914-03 fails with 404 Not Found.
Download of other (older) patches seem to work fine.
Martin.
French, David wrote:
Hey, I apologize if this was already asked and I missed this before, but
what is going to happen to PCA when sunsolve is retired?I just got
an email saying it is being retired later this year and site
decommissioned. Since pca uses sunsolve for downloads, how will that
French, David wrote:
Hey, I apologize if this was already asked and I missed this before, but
what is going to happen to PCA when sunsolve is retired?I just got
an email saying it is being retired later this year and site
decommissioned. Since pca uses sunsolve for downloads, how will that
Martin Paul wrote:
A PCA user reported problems with kernel patch 141444-09 and undefined
symbol errors on reboot after patch installation.
Just for the archives: The problem turned out to be not directly
connected to PCA or patch installation. The OS installation image didn't
include
Hi Raphael,
Welcome to a new prospective PCA user! :)
Does anyone know if Oracle will continue to release that file
publicly and for free? As I understand, PCA relies heavily on the
xref file, so if Oracle will no longer publish it, what would that
mean for PCA? Would it be possible to
Diana Orrick schrieb:
Any suggestions on how to determine if the patching is progressing at all?
I guess you could use truss -f -p PID on the PID of the patchadd
process to see what's going on.
If you have to interrupt the patch installation process, the only good
thing is that PCA is
A PCA user reported problems with kernel patch 141444-09 and undefined
symbol errors on reboot after patch installation. The problem seems to
be reproducible:
# patchadd 141444-09
# init 6
...
SunOS Release 5.10 Version Generic_141444-09 64-bit
Copyright 1983-2009 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All
I've been asked for a copy of patchdiag.xref from the date before the
Solaris 8 Vintage support has been introduced. I don't have one myself,
can anybody provide a copy (by personal e-mail)?
I guess there should be a:
## PATCHDIAG TOOL CROSS-REFERENCE FILE AS OF Mar/31/09 ##
but anything a
Martin Paul wrote:
I've been asked for a copy of patchdiag.xref from the date before the
Solaris 8 Vintage support has been introduced. I don't have one myself,
can anybody provide a copy (by personal e-mail)?
Got it, thanks to Dagobert and Rajiv!
Martin.
Richard Skelton wrote:
While testing my pca wrapper for my proxy the new Macromedia Flash
Player Plugin Patch is failing to download:-
Same here. All patches which are new in today's patchdiag.xref do not
exist on SunSolve (yet). The Patchfinder doesn't find them either.
Maybe they got
And here we go again. Can't even get patchdiag.xref this time:
Resolving sunsolve.sun.com... 192.18.108.40
Connecting to sunsolve.sun.com|192.18.108.40|:443... connected.
^C
Martin.
Rajiv Gunja wrote:
That was one of the hurdles I
met when I wanted to get php, mysql and apache on my U4 server. The SUN
package would not install, as it looked at /etc/release and did not take
into consideration that the U4 was patched to U8 level.
Oh, I didn't know that. For that using the
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Personally I paid money for my support and if I can not get a damn patch
that is a breech of contract.
I understand your anger, but I'm afraid that the most probable reaction
to that would be an immediate stop of Oracle's support for the automatic
hands-off patch
Rajiv Gunja wrote:
Interesting, will look into that bundle and may be add the patch using a
wrapper, only if the requirement is satisfied.
What do you think? Should I add it via wrapper? Do not know if you want to
handle it via pca.
I'm not sure how I could handle that in pca. As the relevant
Hi,
Just FYO - I've been having troubles to download any patch from SunSolve
in the last 5-6 hours. I assume it's a general problem with the server
once again.
Martin.
Craig Bell wrote:
Q: How do I prove that I applied fixes for all vulnerabilities
mentioned in the CPU? Is it reasonable to expect transparent
documentation?
I just saw that link in a comment from Gerry Haskins on his blog entry
you mentioned:
Hi David,
It looks as though the latest revision of this patch has an error in the
dependency checking:
Can you show the complete pca command (and possible ignore settings in
pca configuration files) you used which caused the error?
Comparing it with the rev-14 patch highlights the
David Gameau wrote:
Ah, my apologies here, my diff-explanation wasn't very clear. It appears
that an entry in the pkginfo has changed between 124867-14 and -15:
124867-14:
SUNW_REQUIRES=124861-07 126495-03
124867-15:
SUNW_REQUIRES='124861-07 126495-03'
which does seem to match up
jaear...@colby.edu wrote:
It seems like pca is ignoring/missing the .pca file in my home
directory. Observe:
...
CWD: /export/home/admin/jaearick
Found /usr/sfw/bin/wget (1.12, 11200, https)
You're right, it doesn't find any config files. It would show up like in
this sample output:
CWD:
Martin Paul wrote:
Asif Iqbal wrote:
Hmm.. failing to download a patch started few hours ago. I were able
to download this morning. Something just changed that anyone is aware
of in oracle side with patches ?
The SunSolve server seems to be in a bad state again. I do get 503
Service
Asif Iqbal wrote:
Patch IR CR RSB Age Synopsis
-- -- - -- --- --- ---
140843 -- 01 -S- 274 SunOS 5.8: /usr/sbin/ntpq patch
That's a patch for Solaris 8, it fails for me, too. You need a special
(and expensive) Vintage Patch support
Asif Iqbal wrote:
No. I knew about vintage patches, just did not connect the dot.
However I posted another email about 503 error on solaris 10.
Yes, we're talking about two different problems here. One of them is
SunSolve being in a bad state, returning Error 503: Service
Unavailable. This
A new release of PCA has just been published. Here's a list of new
features and changes:
* Skip reading of input files only when --readme is the sole action
* Do not show cleartext/base64 user/passwd in debug output
* Move pca-proxy-debug.txt from /tmp to /var/tmp
* Whitelist: add 138261,
Just to let you know - I've exchanged private mails with Jeff, and he
fixed the problem by dumping his local version of wget and installing
SUNWwgetr/SUNWwgetu on all Solaris boxes. So he's using
/usr/sfw/bin/wget now, and everything works.
Martin.
Richard,
Another case of incorrect patch metadata in the patchdiag.xref file.
Thanks for the report - I added a fix for 140993/140994 to the current
development release of pca (20100726-01). This one should show the
sparc/x86 patches correctly.
Martin.
Dominique Frise schrieb:
This morning (10:20:08 AM CEST), we are unable to download following
patches:
122212-41 GNOME 2.6.0: GNOME Desktop Patch and
122213-41 GNOME 2.6.0_x86: GNOME Desktop Patch
Same here - all new patches from today failed to download. Maybe they
weren't pushed out to
Dagobert Michelsen schrieb:
As passwords have been pasted repeatedly here by mistake I suggest replacing it
with asterisks in the output.
It's already fixed in the development version of pca, and will show up
in the next official release as well.
Martin.
Glenn Satchell wrote:
It's almost impossible to tell. Akamai can use IP addresses within the
ISP's range to host the Akamai services. There's must be thousands or
tens of thousands of Akamai hosts worldwide.
I see, thanks. The ones I usually get (193.170.140.71, 193.170.140.79)
are at least
For some reason the list management software sent me this message as a
bounce, without actually sending it out to the list. So I'm forwarding
it here:
Original Message
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:49:41 -0400
From: Jeff variver...@gmail.com
Not sure if this is a bug or a
Jeff wrote:
Thanks Martin. An example of the patches I saw is 138135-01. In my case,
these are patches that are associated with packages that are part of another
Sun product but are not part of the OS, or at least I assume they are, even
though I don't see a package associated with that patch
Diana Orrick wrote:
Oracle Sunsolve appears to be down/unaccessible/incredibly slow...again.
Yes, I've seen hangs this morning, too.
Same experience at Memorial Day weekend...
Yes, it seems as it's mostly weekends when the problems show up - I've
experienced download issues on the last
Hi Jürgen,
similar behaviour here (de), pca download failed ( 403 You are not
entitled to retrieve this content.)
As you've done the usual checks and everything looks OK, I guess only
Oracle Support or Don will be able to help here.
[not being pedantic but: send/log username/password as
I still have problems downloading files from https://sunsolve.sun.com/.
Right now, every attempt to download a patch with pca hangs for about 90
seconds before sunsolve answers:
Mon Jun 28 09:42:24 2010: Connecting to
sunsolve.sun.com|192.18.108.40|:443... connected.
Mon Jun 28 09:43:56 2010:
Techie wrote:
My PCA is no longer working since the Oracle buy out of SUN. I went
directly to SUNSOLVE and I cannot download directly from there either.
First thing to check is whether your contract number is listed correctly
in the Update Account section on SunSolve. Ensure that you have the
dpecka wrote:
i was been unable to download since todays morning patchdiag.xref file,
so i've tried it by hand via accessing
For a manual download of patchdiag.xref, better do that:
- Go to http://sunsolve.sun.com/ in your browser
- Select Patches and Updates
- Click on The
Hi Don,
There was an issue on one of the SunSolve servers fixed and hour or so ago.
Can you confirm that you are no longer having issues downloading patches via
http or https now please?
The downloads I tried now all worked, but sunsolve.sun.com is still slow
and it takes 10-30 seconds
Jeff Tejnecky schrieb:
If I download through pca, I see
in the verbose output a couple of redirects before it downloads what looks
like a sunsolve authentication page. Anybody having this problem?
That's usually pointing at the Sun Online Account not being valid
(anymore). Can you login
Hi Don,
I just checked this out and all appears to be working fine for me;
longest delay was about 7 seconds...
The delays have gone down to a similar maximum here, so I guess it's
fine now.
Thanks,
Martin.
Any access to https://sunsolve.sun.com/ via wget or pca is hanging once
again for me this morning, nothing after wget's:
Connecting to sunsolve.sun.com|192.18.108.40|:443... connected.
^C
Martin.
Martin Paul wrote:
Any access to https://sunsolve.sun.com/ via wget or pca is hanging once
again for me this morning ...
... but since about an hour ago, everything looks fine again.
Martin.
Kirk Barry wrote:
It has been probably been over a month since I last used PCA. I saw
the latest news and updated PCA. We do have a contract, and my
account seems to be in order. I can manually download the
recommended patch clusters.
I second Bill's suggestion to re-check your settings
Craig Bell wrote:
Martin Paul wrote:
I tend to see missingr as a modifier to missing, which gets the
current revision. If the r suffix becomes minimal, then missingr
seems ambiguous. Now what about s, which always promotes? Xref is
yet more inconsistent...
Another idea would be to add
Glen Gunselman wrote:
Do not have the old patchdiag.xref file but can reproduce.
The problem has been fixed in the current development release of pca.
/var/tmp/pca --pretend /var/tmp/patchlist.txt --patchdir=/var/tmp/pcatmp
--safe --readme
Out of interest - is there a reason why you do
Paul B. Henson wrote:
I was thinking about the new policy on only patch versions actually
containing a new fix being marked security/recommened, rather than the most
recent version. My understanding is ..
.. correct. Just be aware that the change only affects the Recommended
flag, making
Glen,
Your conclusion maybe correct but your explanation does not fit my recent
experience:
I think that's a completely different problem. The patch-IDs listed by
David French are definitely of the NOT FOUND type I described.
On June 10th I received the same error (Using
Glen,
If you can reproduce the problems, re-run pca with --debug and send me the
output.
Do not have the old patchdiag.xref file but can reproduce. Here's the console
output for the first patch:
Thanks, and sorry that I didn't try it on my own at first - I can
reproduce the issue. It's
A new release of PCA has just been published. Here's a list of new
features and changes:
* Pass on Recommended status from obsolete patches/revisions
* Fix handling of non-standard lines in patchdiag.xref
* Add specifier %o for --format to show the OS column from xref
* Fix handling of
Alexander Skwar wrote:
2010/5/31 Martin Paul mar...@par.univie.ac.at:
dpecka wrote:
i guess that not only me can see today, that pca is unable to work now.
Same here. SunSolve is unresponsive, access to e.g.
https://sunsolve.sun.com/pdownload.do?target=patchdiag.xref
via the browser
dpecka wrote:
btw, i investigated a bit because i have found, that in .xref file is in
position #7 and #8 (indexed from zero) architecture or so ..
at http://sunsolve.sun.com/patchfinder/ you can check and find wanted
patches by using several more filters which pca.pl doesn't know like
above
dpecka wrote:
pca does not use column #7 to match patches to the installed OS release,
as this information has proven to be unreliable in the past. Some
patches have been described as Unbundled although they applied to e.g.
Solaris 10. Therefore, pca uses the information about the included
Craig Bell wrote:
Gerry Haskins writes about upcoming refinements to the Recommended
flag:
As stated in the article, Gerry Haskins and Don O'Malley have provided
details about the planned changes to me beforehand. We've had some
discussions in the last two weeks, and after working out the
Don Jackson schrieb:
Hope nobody else has a contract expire until this gets resolved….
I do, and my experience is similar. My contract expires by the end of
May. So I asked for a quote two months ahead at the end of March, which
I received two days later, with about the same price as before.
Just FYI - patch downloads fail for me this morning, sometimes with 503
Service Unavailable, sometimes with 401 Unauthorized. Seems as if the
problem is being worked on:
http://twitter.com/SunSolve says:
Log-in issues are happening at present on SunSolve. Changes to
internal network
Hi Jan,
Jan Holzhueter wrote:
There is a new entitlement acording to:
http://wikis.sun.com/display/SunSolve/How+Entitlement+Works#entitlements
You need HardwareUpdates - Allows access to firmware,drivers,
to get firmware.
Thanks for the link!
I don't have that :(
Same here. The funny
Gurugunti, Mahesh wrote:
I list the missing recommended /security patches on Solaris 10 using
pca, but the list shows Solaris 9 missing patches.
Have you - or someone else with the root password - manually installed
packages from the Solaris 9 distribution on this Solaris 10 system? As
pca
Hi,
Ihsan Dogan wrote:
Is it possible to install only the missing patches on host a, which are
installed on host b?
A flash archive, as suggested by Michele, is definitely the best way to go.
If that's not an option, you can get a list of all patches installed on
host b (in the correct
Jan Holzhueter wrote:
Martin Paul wrote:
and I've heard that it may cost like 20% of the price of the machine,
per year.
It's not that much. I read 12% for Hard- and Software and 8% for
Software only. But I still need to see a real price.
Better, but still about half the machine price
Gurugunti, Mahesh wrote:
Find attached the output files.
Thanks. The pkginfo output shows what I was suspecting - you have a
whole lot of Solaris 9 packages installed on this system, for whatever
reason. Here's an example - on Solaris 9 the 32/64bit binaries were
split into two packages:
I've been assured by a trustworthy source that this CPU (Critical Patch
Update) will be an additional service, and not replace the normal patch
publishing cycle. Hear my sigh of relief! :)
Martin.
I've been asked for a certain past copy of patchdiag.xref, which I don't
have. Can anybody who does have a version that fits the timeframe send
it to Bill?
Thanks,
Martin.
Original Message
From: Bill Pilarinos b...@pilarinos.com
I would need a copy of the patchdiag.xref
Glenn Satchell wrote:
Here's where it got that info, so some script or something changed the
contents of the file without updating the package info:
AFAIK, that's caused by the installation of 141876 itself. It comes with
a script (i.emlxsconf) which merges changes into the existing
Martin Paul wrote:
Myers, Mike wrote:
I ran into this and spent some time tracking it down:
http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5421069messageID=10891459
Congratulations on isolating this bug. I'm sure you had a lot of fun
with 12-06 :) It's a good example why a programmer
Michael Jackson wrote:
Nothing I read in the readme argued whether I should care about the failed
file verification.
There's nothing in the patch README, because the message comes from
pca's --safe option. It's a false positive which can be ignored, ie.
simply install the patch without
Michael Jackson wrote:
Hi Martin: Wasn't a disguised dig either at Don or yourself; Just that the
readme and googling left me none the wiser.
Sorry if my reply might have sounded rude - it wasn't meant to be.
Sometimes translations from german to english by a non-native speaker
end up like
Martin Paul wrote:
Glen Gunselman wrote:
I see some comments at the bottom of
http://wikis.sun.com/display/SunSolve/How+Entitlement+Works
indicating problems with entitlements after recent changes on Sun's
end ...
Thanks for pointing me at this - I seem to have the same problem as
reported
French, David wrote:
Anyway, I started patching the current BE with this patch before running
the pca -R version for the alternate BE.I wanted others to know in
case they were also doing pca patching of alternate BE's under LU, or
using -R in general.
Good advice - thanks!
Martin, I
Hi,
Dennis Clarke wrote:
I think you just need to edit the man page slightly :
You're right - your version of the man page header/footer makes much
more sense. I've adapted my script with the required options for pod2man
to create output as you proposed. The man pages available on pca's
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Do you have a support contract for Solaris 8 and Solaris 9 also ?
As I said - the contract I'm talking about doesn't mention a Solaris
version anywhere (nor a term like Solaris subscription or else which I
can find on Sun's support site). It's well possible that some
Scott A. Severtson wrote:
Good news, everyone! We've been assigned to a new support engineer
(after much complaining), who states:
We do support PCA as a patching tool, by the way.
This change in mind might also be connected to me getting in contact
with Gerry Haskins right after your
A new release of PCA has just been published. Here's a list of
new features and changes:
* Show timing information and patch counts during patch installation
* Do not recommend/require reboot when noreboot option is used
* Work better on non-Solaris machines (e.g. Linux)
* Documentation: A
Scott A. Severtson wrote:
Per Sun's support engineer:
PCA is not a supported way to apply patches and it must be used
at the user's own risk.
But patchadd is a supported way to apply patches, and that's exactly
what's being used by PCA. PCA never tried to install patches on its own,
Russ Oliver wrote:
When going through patch readmes, I'm curious to know if the
information for each note stays the same across patches, or if they
can be updated on each patch. It seems, from what I've noticed, that
if say, patch-07 has 10 notes with it, those same 10 notes are
identical for
Myers, Mike wrote:
I ran into this and spent some time tracking it down:
http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5421069messageID=10891459
Congratulations on isolating this bug. I'm sure you had a lot of fun
with 12-06 :) It's a good example why a programmer shouldn't rely on
any
Hello,
I keep local copies of the patchdiag.xref file. I'd like to append
the date or some other unique string to each such patchdiag.xref
filename. Then, when I am installing a new machine, I would like to
pull/specify a specific patchdiag.xref file to be used for that
machine (tagged/QA'ed
Hi Beth,
Beth Morin bethnda...@cox.net wrote:
Our network has NO internet access so we have to sneaker net our
patches into the system.
PCA is of good use in such an environment.
I have been reading a bit about PCA and see that you can use a
local server. Would it be reasonable to say that
John Lyman wrote:
Is there a way to view required PROM updates along with missing patches?
Eric and Glenn are correct - the only bit of information that pca could
use to correlate firmware patches with a certain machine is the textual
description of the patch. This might look simple at
201 - 300 of 503 matches
Mail list logo
