[9031] in bugtraq
Re: "solaris 7" name change consequences
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John RIddoch)
Mon Jan 11 11:43:42 1999
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:19:27 +0000
Reply-To: John Riddoch <jr@master.scms.rgu.ac.uk>
From: John RIddoch <jr@SCMS.RGU.AC.UK>
To: BUGTRAQ@NETSPACE.ORG
> Incidentally, I've been using 1.0.1 (hadn't noticed there was a new
> version), and even for older Solaris versions (no potential for version
> numbering confusion) the list may not be 100% right - there's a tendency to
> list patches that won't even install (because they're for uninstalled
> Solaris components), while security patches for add-on software (not part of
> Solaris itself) may well be omitted... Presumably at least in part a
> question of what's included in the patchdiag.xref data files downloaded from
> SunSolve.
This was something I had noticed and had hoped would be fixed in 1.0.2 (I was
still using 1!), although I hadn't noticed the lack of patches for addon
products.
I would guess the patchdiag.xref file does not contain enough information to
ascertain whether it is the right CPU type (some patches are only for sun4u),
whether the package is installed etc. Perhaps this should be in a wish-list
for patchdiag 2?
Furthermore, sometime between 1 and 1.0.2, patchdiag begins to require the
timelocal.pl file in the same directory as the patchdiag script or if fails
with:
Can't locate timelocal.pl in @INC at patchdiag.pl line 210.
This means I have to cd to the timelocal.pl before I can run it (previously, I
could just run patchdiag provided it was in my $PATH).
--
John Riddoch Email: jr@scms.rgu.ac.uk Telephone: (01224)262730
Room C4, School of Computer and Mathematical Science
Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, AB25 1HG
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
