Bad patch 118844-30

Just wondering if no one else is having issues with the Sun kernel patches?
A month ago we tried to install 118844-28, which failed to install see http://forum.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=28707&tstart=0
Now they release a new kernel patch, which seem to have the exact same problem.
The patch refuses to install saying that patch 117435-02 must be installed first and machine must be rebooted. The 117435-02 patch came with the installation of the OS.
From the prepatch script     #
     # biosdev failed. We can still apply the patch if the rootdisk
     # is the same as the bootdisk
     bootdev=`prtconf -v /devices | sed -n '/boot-device/{n;p;}' | grep pci | cut -f 2 -d \'`
     rootdev=`df -k ${BASEDIR:-/} | nawk 'NR > 1 { print $1 }'`
     if [ -n "$bootdev" ] ; then
          ls -l $rootdev | grep $bootdev > /dev/null
          if [ $? = 0 ]; then
               return 0
          fi
     fiRunning prtconf -v /devices will result in the following (among other things)name='bootpath' type=string items=1
            value='/pci@0,0/pci-ide@7/ide@0/cmdk@0,0:a'
name='bios-boot-device' type=string items=1
            value='80'Since they are still using sed -n '/boot-device/{n;p;}' which will return value='80' this patch will fail to install.

I've been trying to upgrade past 118844-26 for a while. This machine started out as a Solaris 10 x86 1/06 DVD install. I experience errors like you guys have listed here. My favorite so far was this, though:
118844-27
Executing prePatch script...
Once this KU patch is installed and you have rebooted your system,
you will not be able to patchrm this patch safely.  Once the NEWBOOT
support is installed, removing it may cause your system to not
be bootable.
Do you wish to continue this installation {yes or no} [yes]?
(by default, installation will continue in 60 seconds)
Checking installed patches...
Executing prepatch script...
Usage: grep -hblcnsviw pattern file . . .
ERROR: One of the following may need to be corrected prior to installing this patch.
ERROR:
ERROR: The boot device may be different from the root device on biteme4.
ERROR: If you have booted from a floppy disk, eject the disk and reboot biteme4 prior
ERROR: to installing this patch.
ERROR: You may have forgotten to reboot biteme4 AFTER installing 117435-02.
ERROR: This configuration requires that 117435-02 be installed first and the
ERROR: system must then be rebooted prior to installing this patch.
The prepatch script exited with return code 1.
Patchadd is terminating.note the usage error on 'grep' ... apparently this patch had its grep arguments not quite sorted :)
I'll try the techniques posted here to see if I can move forward. Thanks for the input on this subject, folks!

Similar Messages

  • Patch 118844-28 fails to install on Ultra 20?

    We're trying to run the standard updatemanager on our Ultra 20 running Solaris 10 x86. We've installed patches a number of times but we're hitting a wall with the recent kernel patch, 118844-28.
    This patch shows up as needing to be applied in both the updatemanager gui as well as when we run smpatch analyze. The problem is that it doesn't seem like it will install even though the tools say that the installation procedure was successful. Specifically: we instruct the gui to install the patch, it goes off and looks like it's installing, it comes back and says that the installation is complete and successful and that we need to reboot the machine, we tell it to reboot the machine and it does. But when the machine comes back up the updatemanager (and smpatch) still says that this patch needs to be applied. And showrev says that we're still back at version 27. So it seems like it's properly applying the patch but then the patch isn't actually applied.
    We tried to install the patch by hand with smpatch add in single user mode and we had a similar experience. The only exception being that the patch process complained that we had to have patch 117435-02 installed (which we do).
    Has anybody seen this before? Has anybody gotten this patch to install on this hardware?

    Yes, I agree with that fix- I just did it a little opposite:
    # eeprom boot-device=/pci@0,0/pci-ide@11,1/ide@0/cmdk@0,0:a
    which added an extra alias (permanently) to my 'BIOS' settings-
    # eeprom | grep boot
    bootpath=/pci@0,0/pci-ide@7/ide@0/cmdk@0,0:a
    boot-device=/pci@0,0/pci-ide@7/ide@0/cmdk@0,0:a
    I re-ran the 10 Rec. Cluster and it not only installed the kernel patch, but, a handful of other patches in the bundle too.
    --David                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

  • Unable to boot the sytem after applying kernel patch 118844-27

    We have an hp ProLiant DL380 Storage server connected to HP StorageWorks Moduler Smart Array 30 via SCSI. Solaris 03/05 was installed previously on this system with kernel 118844-20. When I queried and installed all required patches with 'smpatch add -i .. ' command, all patches applied and the system is rebooted. After reboot, the system kept restarting. I followed the instructions on Sun Alert document 102087, and installed grub using 01/06 1st CDROM. It installed successfully, but problem persisted. The systems started booting, but before printing 'Configuring devices' the system rebooted again. Providing -v option to the kernel, it lastly printed a PCI device id (/pci@....) and after 2-3 seconds rebooted again.
    Finally I had to reinstall the solaris (this time 01/06). The disk was accessible after booting with CD ROM, and I was able to get cylinder numbers of disk, and I installed the new system to the root partition of the other live upgrade environment. The boot disk was partitioned under linux, it was three partitions, Solaris2 (50GB),Solaris(4GB),Linux(18GB). Installation medium told that the fdisk partition was invalid, and i repartitioned the whole disk again.
    System up and running Solaris 10 01/06 now, but the strange thing is that, previously hard disk (both boot disk and disks on array) locations were identified as '/dev/rdsk/c0tx' but now, the system sees that hard disks at '/dev/c1tx' and CDROM at '/dev/c0t0'.
    Now I want to ask tow questions:
    * Could this disk number change made the system unbootable previously?
    * May I safely apply patch 118844-28 to the system
    -Thanks

    Here's a similar topic https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=536210 also if that doesn't work you should install vesa as it also says it's not found in your log.

  • Driver e1000g problem - patch 118844-30

    Hi,
    the situation is like this. I have fujitsu-siemens pc and Solaris 10 03/05 x86 installed. I wanted to patch it with latest recommended patch cluster. After that I was not able to get to default router and switch did not see my mac anymore. I looked in the patch cluster and removed patch by patch till the kernel patch 118844-30. I finished my todays troubleshooting with one big ZERO :-), but it works now a can sleep well. There was no error reported in log files, no smf failed, nothing. If anyone knows, where is the real problem or how to apply some work-around, it would be great.
    Le

    Yes, I also experienced the same thing with 118844-30 and 118822-30. It seems other people are also having issues with 118855-xx. I simply bypassed these patches, after a painful rebuild, and now everything is OK, including all other recommended patches.

  • Patch 118844-21 killed my laptop!

    Solaris 3/05 loaded just fine, recently patch 118844-21 installed GRUB as a bootloader, replacing the one that Sol 10 3/05 installed. Now the machine does not complete a boot. It loads the copyright notice and then hangs. Before this patch my laptop was quite happy. What gives?

    Hi,
    I'm new on Solaris, I installed the Solaris 10 3/05 on my lap and yesterday I installed the patches recommended and today I found that I can't boot with Solaris. I think I have the same problem but I don't know how to uninstall the patches that you mentioned.
    Can you help me?
    Thanks.

  • Kernel patch 118844-30 problem

    I have an AMD-64 computer and when I try to install patch 118844-30 (and dependent patch for send mail), and restart, I get a million error messages at bootup, including "is syslogd running?". I had to reinstall the whole OS to get back to normal. Other updates worked fine.

    Yes, I also experienced the same thing with 118844-30 and 118822-30. It seems other people are also having issues with 118855-xx. I simply bypassed these patches, after a painful rebuild, and now everything is OK, including all other recommended patches.

  • What exactly became of the "bad patches"

    Some months ago the http://www.sun.com/forte/developer/hotnews.html page advertising that some BAD patches existed without going into too much detail about them. I experienced an application breaking in DBTools.h++ after applying some recommended patches for Sun Workshop 5 and therefore rolled them back. I even stepped through the debugger and saw erroneous assignements to a template class' constructor arguments.
    My revisions before patching were: 107295-01, 107311-09, 107354-01, 107355-04, 107357-07
    The changed revisions after patching were 02, 11, 02, 06, 09 respectively. These are still the recommended patches and I have tried patching a completely unpatched machine at a different site also using DBTools.h++ and seeing it break again.
    Questions are:
    Can I obtain the older revision levels of the patches ?
    Can someone shed some light on what approach to take to this ?
    Thanks

    Hi Chris,
    Have a look at: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_koLdJqpUFo] The quality is not very good, but perhaps this will give you an idea of what's going to be available in Apex 4
    Andy

  • Solaris 10 X86 kernel patch 118844-30 ... probably bad

    I installed the patch on some Dells. Seemed to run fine.
    Actually, I installed 121127-01, 113000-07, and 118344-06
    first since they were required by 118844-30.
    Some problems have now turned up.
    1. When you power cycle one of the patched machines they
    refuse to boot with
    Warning - The following files in / differ from the boot archive:
    /boot/solaris/bootenv.rc
    to continue booting .. #svc clear system/boot-archive
    and then demand the root password.
    2. Randomly, when you do a reboot, a patched machine will claim
    that the hardware has changed and demand that you run
    kdmconfig. Simply going in and out of kdmconfig, without
    changes, does the job. Weird.
    3. I went to patch the next machine and after the patch
    install and reboot, it was a total brick, with the error
    File not executable
    Panic : No entry point in kernel/unix
    Press any key to reboot
    And, naturally, this patch cannot be backed out. For yucks
    I tried the equivalent patches on a sparc. No problems. So
    I think Sun effed up the GRUB stuff in the kernel patch

    Ok ... I noticed that deep down in the README for the patch
    they say to do a "reboot -r". Cute. We'll try that.
    That seemed to go ok, but when I tried a power cycle, it
    wouldn't boot, claiming
    SMF database integrity check of /etc/svc/repository.db
    failed making me run
    /lib/svc/bin/restore_repository
    which turned out to be a struggle.
    My advice - stay FAR AWAY from this patch. At minumum,
    it makes the power up boot process VERY delicate. Wait
    for the -32 rev, which I predict will not be long in coming.
    Thank you sun.

  • Manual install of patch 118844-28

    I'm trying to do a patchadd on 118844-28, but it complains that patch 117435-02 must be installed first or that the computer needs to be rebooted after the patch 117435-02 has been applied.
    When using the Update Manager it seems that 117435-02 has been installed and I've rebooted numerous times after that, but still when I try patchadd on the kernel patch above it gives me that error message.
    Am I doing something wrong or what's going on?
    It was quite awhile since I used Solaris and I've now installed Solaris 10 x86 1/06 and used the Update Manager to install patches, but the kernel patch apparently must be installed manually so I've done a "shutdown -i S" to get into single user mode (I'm not sure if that's how one is supposed to do it) then
    cd /var/sadm/spool/
    patchadd 118844-28
    Any ideas?

    There may be a bug in the patch, in the prepatch script to be precise.
    In the prepatch script there the line
    bootdev=`prtconf -v /devices | sed -n '/boot-device/{n;p;}' | grep pci | cut -f 2 -d \'`
    change boot-device to bootpath and then the patch seems to install alright.
    See this thread for more information http://forum.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=28707&tstart=0

  • Bad Patch 122460

    Has anyone else had problems with patch 122460 ? I have downloaded it but when I tried to unzip it to install I get:
    -bash-3.00$ unzip 122460-01.zip
    Archive: 122460-01.zip
    End-of-central-directory signature not found. Either this file is not
    a zipfile, or it constitutes one disk of a multi-part archive. In the
    latter case the central directory and zipfile comment will be found on
    the last disk(s) of this archive.
    unzip: cannot find zipfile directory in one of 122460-01.zip or
    122460-01.zip.zip, and cannot find 122460-01.zip.ZIP, period.
    -bash-3.00$
    I also tried the signed patch but get a similar message.

    THe download was bad.

  • One bad patch? KB3035131

    I had a 50% failure rate in my test group for patch KB3035131.
    From the WUAHandler.log
    1. Update (Missing): Security Update for Windows Server 2008 R2 x64 Edition (KB3035131) (3c704f78-5f61-4a0d-aae5-4e154e6f13b6, 202)
    WUAHandler 3/12/2015 11:28:02 AM
    4356 (0x1104)
    Failed to find update (df7f383f-b308-4d1a-a145-8c8b9514c703) with binary in update collection from WUA. Continuing with download.
    WUAHandler 3/12/2015 11:28:03 AM
    4356 (0x1104)
    All systems in the test group use the same DP so I am unsure as to why some would have an issue with the update missing and others would not.
    The systems that failed did patch a different patch at the same time.
    Any help would be great! 

    Quote from https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/kb/3035131
    If you manually install the security update that is described in advisory 3033929 and then manually install security update 3035131, you receive a message that states that update 3035131 is already installed. In this scenario, security update 3035131
    is not added to the list of installed updates. Update 3033929 includes the security updates that are provided by update 3035131. Therefore, the system is not in an unprotected state in this scenario, even though update 3035131 is not added to the
    list of installed updates. Customers who plan to manually install both updates are advised to install the 3035131 update before they install the 3033929 update. If customers manually install the updates in this order, the list of installed updates will
    include both updates.
    So check if 3033929 is installed on those failing clients, uninstall it and install 3035131 first.

  • Nvidia module in X fails to load after Patch 118844-28

    I'm new to Solaris so please bear with me.
    I just received a shipment of Ultra 20 workstations and while setting up one of them, I used the Update manager to install all the patches. After installing the kernel update, X fails to run since the Nvidia module doesn't load, which makes sense since its a new kernel(Is this wrong, I'm used to Linux).
    So I download the latest nvidia module from Nvidia.com and the installer runs with no problem. I reboot and still no go.
    I've looked around and found something about using the update_drv command, and I tried that with no luck. Used reboot -- -r to reconfigure everything and still nothing. There is nothing that stands out from dmesg, so I'm at my wits end.
    Any ideas?

    After installing
    the kernel update, X fails to run since the Nvidia
    module doesn't load, which makes sense since its a
    new kernel(Is this wrong, I'm used to Linux).I don't know why X or the Nvidia module fails after the kernel
    upgrade...
    But for Solaris is does not make sense that drivers start to fail
    when the kernel is patched. This assumes the driver is using
    documented kernel interfaces only - in this case a kernel update
    should not cause driver failures.

  • Bad pixel patch correction in 2D image

    In one CCD image (600X800), I have few patches of bad pixels (few are in irregular shapes, few are in regular one like rectangle of 8X8 pixels). For correcting these bad pixel patches, I am looking for some surface fitting function, which should have provision for excluding the defined pixel location.
     These bad pixel patches needs to be computed by fitted surface only.

    ashok_kumar wrote:
    HI Thoric, 
    Thanks for reply,
    When I convert the image in 2D array, bad patches also comes into 2D array.
    of course...
    and when I tried interpolation2D.vi, it considers these bad pixels for interpolation also.
    I need to exclude these pixels for fitting (interpolation). How to exclude these points ?
    Kindly help.
    exactly, and this is where it gets complicated. So long as you know where the good and bad pixels are you can work on subsets of the 2D array that contain only one bad pixel, replacing that bad pixel with an interpolation of the surrounding good pixels. So, try working on 3x3 or 4x4 subsets that each contain only 1 bad pixel and perform the interpolation on each one at a time, putting the new interpolated result back into the original 2D array. With a knowledge of where each bad pixel is you can attack each one singularly.
    Thoric (CLA, CLED, CTD and LabVIEW Champion)

  • Proper procedure for patching from Single User mode

    Typically when I install a patch cluster from Sun, I do a sanity reboot from the console of the server using:
    shutdown -y -g0 -i6
    When the system comes back online, I log into the console again and then do:
    shutdown -y -g0 -i0 (to go into OBP)
    then
    boot -s (to go into single user mode)
    The procedure above was given to me from a Sun technician.
    Then I install the patch cluster and reboot. It has come to my attention that Sun recommends breaking any mirrors between your disks before patching. I wanted to know what is the best way to do this for both Veritas Volume Manager and Solaris Volume Manager. For Veritas Volume Manager, I was thinking of going into the vxdiskadm menu driven utility and choosing the option to "Remove a disk for replacement" for the rootmirror disk and then after a reboot to check that the patches did not cause a problem, go back into vxdiskadm and choose the option "Replace a failed or removed disk" and select the rootmirror which should then begin to automatically resync itself to the primary rootdisk. Any comments on if this is a proper way to do this or if someone has a better method, I would love to hear it. I am assuming a system with just two internal disks: c1t0d0s2 and c1t1d0s2
    Also, if anyone can comment on how to do this with Solaris Volume Manager or if it is required would be great also.
    Thanks much for any advice.

    Typically when I install a patch cluster from Sun, I
    do a sanity reboot from the console of the server
    using:
    shutdown -y -g0 -i6
    When the system comes back online, I log into the
    console again and then do:
    shutdown -y -g0 -i0 (to go into OBP)
    then
    boot -s (to go into single user mode)
    The procedure above was given to me from a Sun
    technician.Not a bad thing to check reboot before patching, but I don't think it's in any official documentation that I'm aware of.
    Then I install the patch cluster and reboot. It has
    come to my attention that Sun recommends breaking any
    mirrors between your disks before patching.Again, I don't know if it's "official", but if you have a backup copy that you could boot from, it does reduce the possibilities of critical problems from a bad patch.
    I wanted
    to know what is the best way to do this for both
    Veritas Volume Manager and Solaris Volume Manager.
    For Veritas Volume Manager, I was thinking of going
    into the vxdiskadm menu driven utility and choosing
    the option to "Remove a disk for replacement" for the
    rootmirror disk and then after a reboot to check that
    the patches did not cause a problem, go back into
    vxdiskadm and choose the option "Replace a failed or
    removed disk" and select the rootmirror which should
    then begin to automatically resync itself to the
    primary rootdisk. Any comments on if this is a proper
    way to do this or if someone has a better method, I
    would love to hear it. I am assuming a system with
    just two internal disks: c1t0d0s2 and c1t1d0s2
    Also, if anyone can comment on how to do this with
    Solaris Volume Manager or if it is required would be
    great also.Well, it'll work as you've described, but what if the patches fail? The disconnected mirror is not bootable. You'd have to go through an unencapsulation and other things from a CD.
    I've often simply pulled one side of the mirror while the machine was shutdown. Since the mirror was valid prior to pulling, it will boot. If there's a problem, I shut down, swap disks, and boot from the untouched mirror. If no problem, I re-insert, reattach the disk to the diskgroup, then recover the volumes.
    I don't know of any nice supported method of booting from an offline VxVM mirror that doesn't involve a very long series of steps. My method isn't supported, but it does work. If you have both disks in the machine at the same time though, it'll update the private regions. Don't do that until you're ready to sync up one way or the other. Test before doing it in production.
    In any event, you should have a backup ready to go.
    Darren

  • Updatemanager java.null.pointer exception in installing patches !

    Hey,
    I started Updatemanager and get 8 patches to be installed on my system. When I click: Install 8 items now I get an exception from updatemanager:
    Updating the local cache complete.
    inside AvailablePanel.applyUpdateCollection()
    updateCollection: Current Available Updates
    updateCollection.getUpdates().length: 8
    mouse clicked at column index: 0
    java.lang.NullPointerException
    at com.sun.swup.client.engine.solaris.SolarisInstaller.beginInstall(SolarisInstaller.java:61)
    at com.sun.swup.client.ui.InstallDialog$InstallWorker.construct(InstallDialog.java:321)
    at com.sun.swup.client.ui.foundation.swing.SwingWorker$2.run(SwingWorker.java:109)
    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:595)
    and the installation process is stall. Nothing happens for hours so I have to manually kill the client, updatemanager. Every time I try I get this error which makes for me impossible to install patches !
    anyone any ideas what's going on ? I'm running Solaris 10 GA.
    thank you,
    stefan

    This issue should now be resolved. If you are using the Update Manager you will first need to manually update your analysis (click "Check for Updates") which will clear out the bad patch meta data causing the problem. You then should be able to use UM to install updates as intended.
    thanks for your patience
    -Dave

Maybe you are looking for

  • DVI - video adapters

    Hi I´m about to upgrade a MacPro to use in a multiscreen live video environment. Unfortunately, the standard in this business is Composite video, not DVI or VGA, so I need to convert the output from multiple video cards to Composite video. I want one

  • Time issue with iphone 5c?

    after upgrading to 7.0.3 our 5c quits keeping time when the autolock is used when unlocked time starts but is behind. Anyone else seen this or have suggestions.?

  • Why do JPGs print as a mix of characters after Leopard upgrade?

    I can print MS Word document. I can print a Jpeg files through iPhoto. However,I can't print a JPEG with Photoshop CS3. It sends the file to my HP Color LaserJet 2550n, but it prints out several lines of mixed characters across dozens of pages. No im

  • Deleting or Filtering Bulk E-mail with "[Bulk]"

    Either through Apple's e-mail, or my ISP's settings, I am unable to block bulk e-mail, specifically that contains, and usually begins with "[Bulk]" in the From line. It seems to have something to do with the [ and ] ("[" and "]") symbols in the addre

  • Clearing Form after Error

    Hi All, The form I'm working after commit, the records don't disappear, whereas, now I want when there is error, then also the records must not be disappear. How do I display the records with just the error meassage, and also validate the item for ri