HP3000-L Archives

September 1998, Week 5

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Michael D. Hensley" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 29 Sep 1998 13:49:50 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (66 lines)
Scott McClellan posited:

[Note: I appreciate Scott's contribution to the discussion.  I hate it when
everyone at HP remains silent.  However, I'm going to have to respectfully
disagree:]

> I just thought I would add some perspective.
>
> * The MPEJXV9B problem (as I understand it) is limited to the
>   Posix shell rm -R (recursive) command. MPE purges, with or
>   without the ;TREE option and shell rm commands without the -R
>   option are NOT effected.

Ok so far...

> * Therefore the MPEJXV9B problem is only a show stopper for a
>   very specific subset of our users. I am very glad Mark pointed
>   out the problem, and I agree that it is serious, particularly
>   for Mark, but many/most customers would not be effected. This
>   would include many/most customers that use Posix.

...but I have to disagree here.  Any user who executes any scripts that
contain "rm -R" will also run into this problem.  Unless you're willing to
read every line of every script you use (and don't forget any that are
executed by batch jobs), you could run into this quite easily.

For example, I have no idea which, if any, of the installation scripts on the
FREEWARE tape do an "rm -R".

> * Even if you are a Posix user, you can avoid installing MPEJXV9B
>   easily by simply "veto"ing it in Patch/iX. If there is a problem
>   with "veto"ing MPEJXV9B it has not been reported. If someone
>   knows of a problem, please speak up.

Good advice, but what about those who install the PowerPatch before they find
out about this problem?  If there is a way to back out a single patch from a
PowerPatch installation, could you post it?  If not, HP should create a patch
to reverse the effect of MPEJXV9B immediately, while they work on solving the
underlying problem.

> I guess my general take on this issue is that it is not a very
> good reason for most customers to avoid PP5. I am still glad that
> Mark Bixby took the time to mention the problem and clarify it.
> Thanks Mark.

If you plan to use POSIX -- JAVA, SAMBA, APACHE, or anything else -- don't
install the MPEJXV9B patch.  If you already have, bug the response center for
a way to de-install it.  And don't buy the "back out the entire PowerPatch
tape and re-install it without that patch" answer unless you have a *lot* of
free time and are *really* bored.

> NOTE: there have been some other issues mentioned here
> that warrant consideration (w.r.t Oracle and one problem with
> HPDATEDIFF). I personally feel like these other issues whould
> weigh more heavily (on average) in deciding whether or not to
> install PP5.

I bet more people will be affected by the POSIX problem than the Oracle and
HPDATEDIFF ones combined -- but I won't bet much.  There don't seem to be
that many Oracle users, and HPDATEDIFF is too new to be in widespread use yet.

---
Michael D. Hensley       | mailto:[log in to unmask]
Allegro Consultants Inc. | Visit scenic http://www.allegro.com
408/252-2330             | "Support Bill of Rights Enforcement"

ATOM RSS1 RSS2