Followup to my own post.
Looks like my SVM setup was having problems prior to patch being applied.
If I boot net:dhcp -s and poke around on the disks, it looks like disk0 is
pre-patch state and disk1 is post-patch.
I can get a shell if I
boot disk1 -s
So I think I am in SVM hell here not
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 12:22:49PM -0800, Vincent Fox wrote:
Reviving this thread.
We have a Solaris 10u4 system recently patched with 137137-09.
Unfortunately the patch was applied from multi-user mode, I wonder if this
may have been original posters problem as well? Anyhow we are now
Reviving this thread.
We have a Solaris 10u4 system recently patched with 137137-09.
Unfortunately the patch was applied from multi-user mode, I wonder if this
may have been original posters problem as well? Anyhow we are now stuck
with an unbootable system as well.
I have submitted a case to
Vincent Fox wrote:
Reviving this thread.
We have a Solaris 10u4 system recently patched with 137137-09.
Unfortunately the patch was applied from multi-user mode, I wonder if this
may have been original posters problem as well? Anyhow we are now stuck
with an unbootable system as well.
I
The SupportTech responding to case #66153822 so far
has only suggested boot from cdrom and patchrm 137137-09
which tells me I'm dealing with a level-1 binder monkey.
It's the idle node of a cluster holding 10K email accounts
so I'm proceeding cautiously. It is unfortunate the admin doing
the
I don't want to steer you wrong under the circumstances,
so I think we need more information.
First, is the failure the same as in the earlier part of this
thread. I.e., when you boot, do you get a failure like this?
Warning: Fcode sequence resulted in a net stack depth change of 1
I don't want to steer you wrong under the
circumstances,
so I think we need more information.
First, is the failure the same as in the earlier part
of this
thread. I.e., when you boot, do you get a failure
like this?
Warning: Fcode sequence resulted in a net stack depth
change of
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:44:56PM -0800, Ed Clark wrote:
Hi Ed,
messages from the underlying pkging commands are captured in the
/var/sadm/patch/PID/log file
messages from patchadd itself and patch level scripts (prepatch, postpatch,
etc) go to stdout/stderr
these are two distinct
I noticed this while patching to 137137-09 on a UFS Sparc today:
Patch 137137-09 has been successfully installed.
See /var/run/.patchSafeMode/root/var/sadm/patch/137137-09/log for details
Executing postpatch script...
Detected SVM root.
Installing bootblk on /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0s0
Installing bootblk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I thought to look at df output before rebooting, and there are PAGES PAGES
like this:
/var/run/.patchSafeModeOrigFiles/usr/platform/FJSV,GPUZC-M/lib/libcpc.so.1
7597264 85240 7512024 2%/usr/platform/FJSV,GPUZC-M/lib/libcpc.so.1
. . .
Hundreds of
We noticed following postpatch error while installing patch 137137-09 on
systems with STMS enabled (MPxIO) and fiber channels systems disks:
Patch 137137-09 has been successfully installed.
See /var/run/.patchSafeMode/root/var/sadm/patch/137137-09/log for details
Executing postpatch
hi,
We noticed following postpatch error while installing
patch 137137-09 on systems with STMS enabled (MPxIO)
and fiber channels systems disks:
Patch 137137-09 has been successfully installed.
See
/var/run/.patchSafeMode/root/var/sadm/patch/137137-09/
log for details
Executing
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 09:27:32AM -0800, Ed Clark wrote:
Hi Ed,
1. a copy of the 137137-09 patchadd log if you have
http://iws.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/~elkner/137137-09/
thanks for info - what you provided here is the patch pkg installation log,
Yes, actually the only one, I have/could
Hi,
1. a copy of the 137137-09 patchadd log if you have
one available
cp it to
http://iws.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/~elkner/137137-09/
Can't spot anything unusual.
thanks for info - what you provided here is the patch pkg installation log,
what i was actually after was patchadd log
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 04:54:57PM -0800, Gerry Haskins wrote:
Jens, http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/patches/firmware/release_history.jsp on
the Big Admin Patching center, http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/patches/ list
firmware revisions.
Thanks a lot. Digged around there and found, that 121683-06
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 01:07:29PM -0800, Ed Clark wrote:
hi,
is the system still in the same state initially reported ?
Yes.
ie. you have not manually run any commands (ie. installboot) that would have
altered the slice containing the root fs where 137137-09 was applied
could you
What hardware are you on, and what firmware are you at.
Issue is coming from firmware.
Enda
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:50:02AM -0800, Enda wrote:
What hardware are you on, and what firmware are you at.
Issue is coming from firmware.
Sun Fire V240 with OpenBoot 4.22.23
Tried to find out, whether there is an OBP patch available, but haven't
found anything wrt. V240, V440 and V490 :(
Jens, http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/patches/firmware/release_history.jsp on the
Big Admin Patching center, http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/patches/ list firmware
revisions.
If it's the same as a V490, then I think the current firmware version is
121689-04,
Hi,
in preparation to try zfs boot on sparc I installed all recent patches
incl. feature patches comming from s10s_u3wos_10 and after reboot
finally 137137-09 (still having everything on UFS).
Now it doesn't boot at anymore:
###
Sun Fire V240, No Keyboard
Copyright
20 matches
Mail list logo
