Solaris 8 smpatch - no patches required

I've read through most of the discussions and have not been able to find an answer. I am running Solaris 8 and appear to have all of the settings correct, but smpatch analyze always returns - no patches required.
smpatch get returns:
patchpro.backout.directory - ""
patchpro.download.directory /var/spool/pkg/patchpro /var/sadm/spool
patchpro.install.types interactive:rebootafter:reconfigafter:singleuser:standard rebootafter:reconfigafter:standard
patchpro.patch.source - https://updateserver.sun.com/solaris/
patchpro.patchset - patchdb
patchpro.proxy.host - ""
patchpro.proxy.passwd **** ****
patchpro.proxy.port - 8080
patchpro.proxy.user - ""
patchpro.sun.passwd **** ****
patchpro.sun.user hopeb ""

I would assume that you know the host requires some patches (i.e. has not recently been updated using a patch cluster).
Does the system require to connect via a proxy?
Try the following command
# smpatch set patchpro.patchset=patchdb1
Then run smpatch analyze again.

Similar Messages

Smpatch always reports 'No patches required'

I have a Solaris 9 machine which I've always kept up to date with smpatch. Recently, smpatch stopped providing reliable information about needed patches. Instead it always reports: 'No patches required.'
bash-2.05# smpatch analyze
No patches required.
If I ask for a specific patch which I know I need, it says it doesn't exist:
bash-2.05# smpatch download -i 112960-67
The following patches were not downloaded:
112960-67 Patch does not exist.
Here are the relevant smpatch properties for this machine:
bash-2.05# smpatch get
patchpro.backout.directory - ""
patchpro.download.directory - /var/sadm/spool
patchpro.install.types - rebootafter:reconfigafter:standard
patchpro.patch.source - https://updateserver.sun.com/solaris/
patchpro.patchset patchdb1 patchdb1
patchpro.proxy.host "" ""
patchpro.proxy.passwd **** ****
patchpro.proxy.port "" 8080
patchpro.proxy.user "" ""
patchpro.sun.passwd **** ****
patchpro.sun.user - ""
I've read some discussion which suggests Java may be to blame. I've installed a pretty recent JVM:
bash-2.05# java -version
java version "1.6.0_13"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_13-b03)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 11.3-b02, mixed mode, sharing)

Those settings are no longer correct for solaris 9.
That is symptomatic of the obsolete version of update connection software.
Heres what the currently correct settings are from a solaris 9 machine with working smpatch
mildura# smpatch get
patchpro.backout.directory      -               ""
patchpro.baseline.directory     -               /var/sadm/spool
patchpro.download.directory     -               /var/sadm/spool
patchpro.install.types          -               rebootafter:reconfigafter:standard
patchpro.patch.source        -               https://getupdates1.sun.com/
patchpro.patchset               -               current2
patchpro.proxy.host             -               ""
patchpro.proxy.passwd           ****            ****
patchpro.proxy.port             -               8080
patchpro.proxy.user             -               ""But those setting won't work without the new version of the software.

OS patches required in Solaris 10 for JDK 1.5

I need to know if there is a set of required Solaris patches required to install jdk 1.5 and what are those?
The documentation does not contain this information, thus it says that all required patches need to be installed.
Thanks,
Maria

Patches 118668-14 and 118669-14 were fixes to patches 118668-13 and 118669-13 for change request 6609269 so both sets are for Java 1.5.0_13.
I do not have details on when the 1.5.0_14 patches would be available but would assume soon.
Installing the Java download bundle should not affect Update Connection.

Solaris container error - patch

Hi guys,
I tried to install the flar archive and got the following error. i have done the same way to my other solaris 8 box and that container is working fine.
this is my error.
Checking installed patches...
One or more patch packages included in
109147-44 are not installed on this system.
Patchadd is terminating.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:20 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Unpacking patch: 111023-03
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:20 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Installing patch: 111023-03
Checking installed patches...
One or more patch packages included in
111023-03 are not installed on this system.
Patchadd is terminating.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:22 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Unpacking patch: 111431-01
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:22 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Installing patch: 111431-01
Checking installed patches...
One or more patch packages included in
111431-01 are not installed on this system.
Patchadd is terminating.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:23 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Unpacking patch: 112605-04
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:23 EST 2010] S20_apply_patches: Installing patch: 112605-04
Checking installed patches...
ERROR: This patch requires the following patches
which have not been applied to the system:
111431-01 111023-02
Patchadd is terminating.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:24 EST 2010] Postprocess: ERROR: p2v module S20_apply_patches failed: 0
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:24 EST 2010] Postprocess: ERROR: Zone boot failed
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:24 EST 2010] Postprocess: ERROR: Postprocessing failed.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:26 EST 2010] Result: Postprocessing failed.
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:26 EST 2010]
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:26 EST 2010] Result: *** Installation FAILED ***
[Mon Dec 13 13:38:26 EST 2010] Log File: /var/tmp/sambo.install.15654.log
do i need to apply those patched to my globla zone ?
thanks

hi,
apply the patches directly to the global zone.
it should automatically get applied to the non-global zone..
regards,
Raj

Solaris 8 linker patch 109147-21 / 109148-21 breaks runtime linker

The "Sun ONE Studio 8, Compiler Collection Early Access" release requires the
installation of a linker patch (109147-21 sparc / 109148-21 x86).
It seems that the solaris 8 linker patch breaks the runtime linker audit feature
for multithreaded applications.
I can reproduce the problem like this (using $LD_PROFILE, which makes
use of the runtime linker audit feature):
% cat thr.c
#define _REENTRANT
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
void*
thr_main(void*arg)
printf("hello, world!\n");
int
main(int argc, char **argv)
pthread_t tid;
void *rval;
pthread_create(&tid, NULL, thr_main, NULL);
pthread_join(tid, &rval);
exit(0);
% cc -o thr thr.c -lpthread
% thr
hello, world!
OK, fine so far...
Now we try to run the application under rtld audit control:
% env LD_PROFILE=libc.so.1 thr
< the multithreaded application hangs >
% env LD_PROFILE=libc.so.1 LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/lwp thr
< the multithreaded application hangs >
(on a S8 system with 109148-14 installed, this works without hanging!!)
A "pstack `pgrep thr`" command shows multiple LWPs, all blocked
waiting in an lwp_mutex_lock() call, all trying to lock the same
mutex - which happens to be the dynamic linker's global 'rtldlock'.
% pstack `pgrep thr`
7631: thr
----------------- lwp# 1 --------------------------------
dfbd6b5f lwp_mutex_lock (dfbf1618)
dfbd69f6 lwpmutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 2a
dfbc8739 rt_mutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 19
dfbcd575 enter () + 29
dfbd2193 elf_bndr (dfa94eac, 50) + 23
dfbc3339 elf_rtbndr () + 5
----------------- lwp# 2 / thread# 2 --------------------
dfbd6b5f lwp_mutex_lock (dfbf1618)
dfbd69f6 lwpmutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 2a
dfbc8739 rt_mutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 19
dfbcd575 enter () + 29
dfbd2193 elf_bndr (dfa94eac, 238) + 23
dfbc3339 elf_rtbndr () + 5
----------------- lwp# 3 --------------------------------
dfbd6b5f lwp_mutex_lock (dfbf1618)
dfbd69f6 lwpmutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 2a
dfbc8739 rt_mutex_lock (dfbf1618) + 19
dfbcd575 enter () + 29
dfbd4257 auditpltenter () + bb
dfbd431a audit_pltenter (dfa94eac, dfa60414, df92131c, 48, df8a4cd0, df921318) + 7a
dfbc32a2 elf_plt_trace (3, ffffffff, df8a4d44) + 52
df8f435e scsetup (ffffffff, 1) + 7a
df8ea13e lwpstart () + 22
-------------------------- thread# 1 --------------------
df8e961b _swtch   (0) + 3b3
df8eb806 _dopreempt (0) + ea
df8ed247 _sigon   () + 37
df8f41d0 bindclear (1) + 48
dfbc8799 rt_bind_clear (1) + 19
dfbcd87c leave (dfbef0f4) + e8
dfbca8f7 call_init (df8d0288, 1) + 10f
dfbca339 setup (80470fc, 80471e4, 0, 8047ff2, 1000, dfbc17af, dfbf06e4, dfbc0000, ...) + cd5
dfbd3393 _setup   () + 2f7
dfbc323a rtboot () + 58
0804725c ???????? ()
-------------------------- thread# 3 --------------------
df8e7958 threadstart ()
% dbx - `pgrep thr`
Reading -
Reading ld.so.1
Reading libpthread.so.1
Reading libc.so.1
Reading libdl.so.1
Reading libthread.so.1
Reading ldprof.so.1
Reading libmapmalloc.so.1
detected a multithreaded program
Attached to process 7631 with 3 LWPs
t@3 (l@null) stopped in threadstart at 0xdf8e7958
0xdf8e7958: threadstart : call threadstart+0x5 <0xdf8e795d>
(dbx) x 0xdfbf1618 /4X
dbx: warning: unknown language, 'c' assumed
0xdfbf1618: rtldlock : 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x01010000
(dbx) q
detaching from process 7631
Is this a known bug?
Are there patches to fix this issue?

I think this is bugid 4804328.
Synopsis: auditing of threaded applications results in deadlock
It doesn't look like the next patch is avilable
yet, but the bug seems to be on track for being
fixed in patchid 109147-22 (the next rev of the
patch you mention. There should be new patches
for Solaris 8 sparc/intel and Solaris 9 sparc/intel.

Unable to install Solaris 8 OE patches

I'm trying to install the Solaris 8 recommended patch cluster on my new Blade 150. I downloaded and unzipped the patch file, dropped into single user mode, and executed the install_cluster script.
After asking me if I was ready to continue to install (I pressed "y"), a message appeared that it was checked for available disk space, followed by the system prompt-- the script had terminated.
Looking at the raw script file I can see that it should have either told me there was insufficient space (don't think this is a problem) or continued. Instead all it does it silently quit. I'm stuck!

are there enough space on your system
df -kl output

Checking for Patch Requirements for Extended Support of 11.5.10

Hello
I am trying to check for a client that they are meeting the minimum requirements to remain on Extended Support. They use 11.5.10.2 and run that on a 11.2.0.3 db
The method I am using is:
1.
Check to see what is Shared and Licensed via OAM.
This will tell me the products that we must licensed and shared and which we must ensure we meet the minimum
2.
Go to Patch Requirements for Extended Support of Oracle E-Business Suite Release 11.5.10 [ID 883202.1]
and ensure that we are meeting these.
Seems very tedious ... (over 60 products to check) is there another way?
DA

Pl see if this MOS Doc can help
How to Verify the Versions for the 11.5.10 Minimum Baseline Requirement (Note 883202.1) [ID 1271621.1]
Pl also see
https://blogs.oracle.com/stevenChan/entry/ebs_11i_patch_wizard_extended_support_baseline
HTH
Srini

Patching requirements for 1099 reporting

Hi,
we are on R12.0.6. Are there any separate patches required for enabling the 1099 reporting?
Thx

Please see these docs.
Oracle Payables Plans for 2011 1099 Reporting [ID 209913.1]
R12: 1099 Electronic Media Report Completes Status 1 when GL Ledger ID Profile Option is not Set [ID 1267185.1]
R12: Payables 1099: Report 1099 Comma File Format (APXT7C99) Not Differentiating Data With Comma "," [ID 1275826.1]
R12 - APXT7VEE 1099 Report Error - Null Address Element [ID 1117487.1]
R12 - 1099 Forms PDF Output shows Incorrect Year [ID 977419.1]
APXT7RVT - R12 - 1099 Payments Report Returns No Upgraded Data [ID 749521.1]
1099 Programs Fail with REP-1419 - Unable to Compile AP_1099_UTILITIES_PKG [ID 414542.1]
Thanks,
Hussein

JVM patch required for DST on 10.2.0.2 RAC cluster

I have looked all over the internet and Metalink for information regarding the JVM patching on a RAC cluster and haven't found anything useful, so I apologize if this question has already been asked multiple times. Also if there is a forum dedicated to DST issues, please point me in that direction.
I have a 10.2.0.2 RAC cluster so I know I have to do the JVM patching required because of the DST changes. The README for 5075470 says to follow post-implementation steps in the fix5075470README.txt file. Step 3 of those instructions say to bounce the database, and then not allow the use of java until step 4 is complete (which is to run the fix5075470b.sql script).
Here's my question: since this is a RAC database, does that mean I have to shutdown both instances, start them back up, run the script, and then let users log back in? IN OTHER WORDS, AN OUTAGE IS REQUIRED?
Is there a way around having to take an outage? Can I bounce each instance separately (in a rolling fashion) so there's no outage, and then run the script even though users are logged on if I think java isn't being used by the application? Is there a way to confirm whether or not it's being used? If I confirm the application isn't using java, is it ok to run the script while users are logged on?
Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Susan

According to Note: 414309.1 USA 2007 DST Changes: Frequently Asked Questions an Problem for Oracle JVM Patches, question 4 Does the database need to be down before the OVJM patch is applied, the bounce is necessary. That says nothing about a rolling upgrade in RAC.
You might file an SR asking if a rolling upgrade is possible.

Solaris 2.6 Patch cluster

Is there anyone out there knows where I can get the last Solaris 2.6 patch cluster? I know it's de-supported now but sadly some legacy applications are still out there and need to run on old software/hardware.
Many thanks in advance,
Jonathan

if you run a pstack against the core, I might
recognize the failure. Usually, logging is of no
use, as we don't log a crash. . .Thanks. I'll do that. It just generated a new core file.
>
I don't know of any problems with installing 4.15p7,
nor of installing later hotfixes on top of it, and
I've been supporting Messaging Server since 4.0 came
out. . . .
If you've had file permission issues since 4.05,
that's truly news to me, unless it was that pesky
problem with Admin Server, where it would change the
permissions of the logs when it went to roll them
over. I don't remember when we fixed that one, but
we did..We've had file permission issues with the patches since 4.0. When we'd upgrade some of the files would be owned by root and not exec'able by nobody. Some of the patches would fail when the patch process would try to bind to the directory (I don't know why). We've used NMS since the 3.x version. It has also been a long time since we tried to patch to app because our experience was bad. It was stable for a long time (once we disabled shared folders and resolved the nscd issue).

Solaris 10 kernel Patch 127127-11

we need to apply solaris 10 kernel Patch 127127-11 in our prod server as a prerequisite for oracle10g patch set 10.2.0.4 installation
but i found a Doc 242366 (May Cause a system Panic from ip_wput_ioctl()).It is mentioned in doc that Binary relief is available through normal
support channels.Is that Binary complete fix of this problem?If yes, then i need that binary please give me the link where i can download the binary,
If not, then what is the solution of this problem.?
Thanks

These kinds of binary hotfixes/IDR's are only available through sun support to contract customers.
If your concerned, I suggest you raise a support case.
That being said, 127127-11 is kinda old. So I would be surprised if the bug hadnt been fixed by now.
Its been replaced by either 137111 or 137137.
Ive upgraded at least a dozen systems past that level and never seen a problem.
So it can't be too common..

Performace problem in oracle DB after Solaris 10 recommended patching

Dear All,
We are facing some performance problems in our oracle DB qerries and reports recently. We applied Solaris 10 recommended patchset on april 24th. Our monthly report generation acitivity is now running for last 3 days i.e may 11,12,13 and application team is complaining of degraded performance. I can see that the cpu usage on the server is about 100% during the report generation , but everything else is fine. Free memory is 15gb , all mountpoints are under 80% and there is no other hardware issue as well.
Now app team is suspecting that last month patching could be the cause of the problem, because till last month they were performing this activity without having a performance degradtion.
I just need to be sure that solaris 10 recommended patches are not causing this issue. Any of you ever faced such an issue after patch installation ?
The server is V490 with 8 cpu / 32gb RAM. Any hints will be appreciated ?
Thanks in Advance.
Edited by: 1005720 on May 13, 2013 9:58 PM

I did not archive the o/p of prstat but have o/p of top with me
195 processes: 175 sleeping, 13 running, 1 zombie, 6 on cpu
CPU states: 0.0% idle, 78.4% user, 21.6% kernel, 0.0% iowait, 0.0% swap
Memory: 32G phys mem, 16G free mem, 70G total swap, 70G free swap
PID USERNAME LWP PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME CPU COMMAND
18964 oracle 39 41 0 6389M 5488M cpu/1 2:50 15.04% oracle
19638 oracle 26 59 0 6390M 5490M run 0:27 8.58% oracle
19648 oracle 36 31 0 6418M 5516M run 0:21 5.92% oracle
19023 oracle 34 30 0 6398M 5498M run 0:37 5.88% oracle
7229 oracle 38 30 0 6427M 5514M run 234:24 5.69% oracle
6912 oracle 45 31 0 6395M 5483M cpu/16 218:04 5.31% oracle
7216 oracle 28 31 0 6430M 5517M run 232:40 5.04% oracle
19644 oracle 35 40 0 6390M 5490M cpu/17 0:24 4.74% oracle
6897 oracle 112 30 0 6392M 5479M run 236:38 4.52% oracle
3813 oracle 106 31 0 6428M 5528M run 100:11 4.43% oracle
18970 oracle 234 31 0 6398M 5499M cpu/0 1:45 4.15% oracle
19749 oracle 1 32 0 6386M 5486M run 0:00 4.05% oracle
19646 oracle 23 31 0 6405M 5505M run 0:25 3.61% oracle
18972 oracle 11 32 0 6398M 5497M run 2:18 3.61% oracle
7220 oracle 258 32 0 6468M 5555M cpu/3 113:13 3.56% oracle
During the entire issue there was no %iowait.

Solaris 8 Security patches after 03/2009?

Hi,
I need to know if Security patches will continue to be developped after EOL of Solaris 8 on 03/2009.
Thanks

Ok,
You will need a Solaris 8 Vintage Patch Service Contract.
http://www.sun.com/service/eosl/solaris/solaris8eosl.pdf

Can someone share Solaris 10 x86 patch 145028-01?

Hi All,
My sunsolve account does not have priviledge to download Solaris 10 x86 patch 145028-01. Can someone download and share this patch with me?
Regards,
SD

So let's see ...
You want me to spend money in sufficient amounts to have a service sontract that gives me access to patch downloads.
... but you then want it for free?
No!

Patches required for installing the configuration management workbench?

Hi Team,
Please list all patches required for installing the configuration management workbench in Oracle Apps version 11.5.10.2 ?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Suman V.

Hi;
I also suggest to check:
How to Configure the Oracle Configuration Manager with Support WorkBench [ID 1174943.1]
Regard
Helios

Solaris 8 smpatch - no patches required

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for