[Info-vax] VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 removed

Norm, the patch is still available on the FTP site, but ITRC access has been disabled by adding a leading '.' to the filename. This normally indicates, that some problem has been found and HP is putting the patch 'ON HOLD'. Volker.

Volker Halle wrote: > Norm, > > the patch is still available on the FTP site, but ITRC access has been > disabled by adding a leading '.' to the filename. > > This normally indicates, that some problem has been found and HP is > putting the patch 'ON HOLD'. > > Volker. It's being looked into........

VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 has been released today. Volker. 4.3 New problems addressed in the VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 kit 4.3.1 Incorrect Build Identification 4.3.1.1 Problem Description: The IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE image shipped with VMS732_UPDATE-V1700 and VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 kits did not have the correct build identification. Because of this, the following message might be seen during the installation of VMS732_UPDATE-V1700 or VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 kits. %PCSI-I-RETAIN, file [SYS$LDR]IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE was not replaced because file from kit has lower generation number This kit corrects that problem. However, if the user already has a VMS732_UPDATE-V1600 kit installed on the system, the system would have the IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE with the correct build identification and the user do not have to install this kit on top of VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 as no new fixes were shipped with the image IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE after VMS732_UPDATE- V1600 release. Images Affected: - [SYS$LDR]IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE

In article <6843457d-f5c9-4c23-82be-4bfe339f52a1@21g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, Volker Halle <volker_halle@hotmail.com> writes: > VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 has been released today. > > Volker. > > > 4.3 New problems addressed in the VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 kit To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, one needs 19 only if one needs the patches it includes which one does not have. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new.

On Jun 18, 11:35=A0pm, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig--- remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote: > In article > <6843457d-f5c9-4c23-82be-4bfe339f5...@21g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, > > Volker Halle <volker_ha...@hotmail.com> writes: > > VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 has been released today. > > > Volker. > > > 4.3 =A0New problems addressed in the VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 kit > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. =A0Otherwise, > one needs 19 only if one needs the patches it includes which one does > not have. =A0In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. So HP did not issue a warning like this for UPDATE V17.0 (and did not place that ECO on hold). Argh! In my case, V16.0 had not been previously installed and this informational message was seen once V17.0 was installed. My previous update kit was v12.0. Now I've got to pull down VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 to get the most recent management I/O routines. And then I'll have the most up-to-date patch kits for OpenVMS v7.3-2.

On Jun 18, 10:50=A0pm, Volker Halle <volker_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote: > VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 has been released today. > > Volker. > > 4.3 =A0New problems addressed in the VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 kit > > =A0 =A0 =A04.3.1 =A0Incorrect Build Identification > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 4.3.1.1 =A0Problem Description: > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 The IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE image shipped with > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 VMS732_UPDATE-V1700 and VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 kits did = not > have > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 the correct build identification. =A0Because of this,= the > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 following message might be seen during the installati= on of > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 VMS732_UPDATE-V1700 or VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 kits. > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 %PCSI-I-RETAIN, file [SYS$LDR]IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE wa= s not > replaced > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 because file from kit has lower generation number > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 This kit corrects that problem. =A0However, if the us= er > already > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 has a VMS732_UPDATE-V1600 kit installed on the system= , the > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 system would have the IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE with the c= orrect > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 build identification and the user do not have to inst= all > this > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 kit on top of VMS732_UPDATE-V1800 as no new fixes wer= e > shipped > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 with the image IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE after VMS732_UPDA= TE- > V1600 > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 release. > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Images Affected: > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0- =A0[SYS$LDR]IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE Yuch! We installed Update 14 (way back when), and then Update 17. Now I need to figure out whether or not I've got the right version of IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE, .i.e., from Update 17. Not good... -Ken

In article <2fe6b928-fe19-4aed-86c9-3e40dd6953d4@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, MrLama <starkh@saic.com> writes: > So HP did not issue a warning like this for UPDATE V17.0 (and did not > place that ECO on hold). Argh! Maybe they assumed everyone has 18. > In my case, V16.0 had not been previously installed and this > informational message was seen once V17.0 was installed. My previous > update kit was v12.0. > > Now I've got to pull down VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 to get the most recent > management I/O routines. And then I'll have the most up-to-date patch > kits for OpenVMS v7.3-2. Right.

On Jun 19, 6:16=A0pm, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig--- remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote: > In article > <2fe6b928-fe19-4aed-86c9-3e40dd695...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, > > MrLama <sta...@saic.com> writes: > > So HP did not issue a warning like this for UPDATE V17.0 (and did not > > place that ECO on hold). Argh! > > Maybe they assumed everyone has 18. > > > In my case, V16.0 had not been previously installed and this > > informational message was seen once V17.0 was installed. =A0My previous > > update kit was v12.0. > > > Now I've got to pull down VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 to get the most recent > > management I/O routines. =A0And then I'll have the most up-to-date patc= h > > kits for OpenVMS v7.3-2. > > Right. Sent out on the openvms.org alerts list was the following from HP "This is an update on the recent issue with the VMS732_UPDATE18 kit, because of which the kit had to be made unavailable for a while and a new UPDATE kit for V732 has been released. The latest fix for IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE was shipped with VMS732_UPDATE16 kit and the same was rolled over to the next UPDATE kits. This image had the correct build ident for UPDATE16 kit. When the UPDATE17 was released, the build ident for IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE was updated with the one that was lesser than that in the other kits. Because of this, the following message was seen during the installation of the kit and the image that comes with the kit would not replace the existing one. ************************** %PCSI-I-RETAIN, file [SYS$LDR]IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE was not replaced because file from kit has lower generation number ************************ If the user has the VMS732_UPDATE16 kit installed on the system prior to installation of UPDATE17/UPDATE18 kit, there will not be any regression as the same image was shipped with UPDATE17 and UPDATE18 kits. If the user has any other UPDATE kits(say UPDATE15) installed, the new image will not replace the original one and this leads to a missing fix. This issue was corrected in the new UPDATE19 kit, which was released yesterday. This kit has replaced the UPDATE18 kit." Ask if you want to know more

In article <h1fbja$deh$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de says...> > In article > <6843457d-f5c9-4c23-82be-4bfe339f52a1@21g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>, > Volker Halle <volker_halle@hotmail.com> writes: > > > VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 has been released today. > > > > Volker. > > > > > > 4.3 New problems addressed in the VMS732_UPDATE-V1900 kit > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, > one needs 19 only if one needs the patches it includes which one does > not have. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. This is most definitely not true. V18 and V19 contain lots of other updates that were *not* in V17. As I posted on Monday: UPDATE-V1800 seems to include DELETE-V0100, DRIVER-V0400, FIBRE_SCSI-V1600, GRAPHICS-V0600, IPC-V0300, MAILSHR-V0200, MONTOR-V0100, NETACP-V0100, SHADOWING-V0700, SYS-V1700 and all the stuff that was in UPDATE-V1700, according to the list in the release notes. The only current excluded ECOs seem to be PCSI-V0500 (needed to install UPDATE-V1800) and TZ-V0300. Plus any DECnet, TCP/IP and Motif ECOs you need. I said "seems to" because I haven't installed it on my V7.3-2 system yet, so I can't verify this is the actual list of new ECOs. The info was garnered from the release notes. If you think the release notes are incorrect, then be specific. -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.

In article <MPG.24a5e28a460dda7d98969b@news.verizon.net>, John Santos <john@egh.com> writes: > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, > > one needs 19 only IF ONE NEEDS THE PATCHES IT INCLUDES WHICH ONE DOES > > NOT HAVE. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > > This is most definitely not true. V18 and V19 contain lots of other > updates that were *not* in V17. The upper-case stuff shows that we agree.

The UPDATE kits UPDATE18/UPDATE19 contains few latest kits as mentioned in the release notes. The difference between these two kits is the build ID for the image IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE. >>If VMS732_UPDATE16 kit is already installed on the OpenVMS system, the installation of UPDATE17 or UPDATE18 kits does not create any regression since >>the same image is shipped with the UPDATE17 and UPDATE18 kits. Whereas, if the OpenVMS system has an older UPDATE kit installed, for e.g. UPDATE15, the >>old image is not overwritten and this leads to a missing fix. The above explanation is applicable only to the IMAGE_MANAGEMENT.EXE image and does not relate to any other latest kits that are included in UPDATE18 or UPDATE19. The following few scenarios would require manual intervention in order to have all the latest kits. Scenario-1: UPDATE16 or lower version is installed User action: Install UPDATE19 to have all the latest kits. Scenario-2: UPDATE16 and UPDATE18 is installed. User action: None. As the latest kits are available on the system. Scenario-3: UPDATE16 and UPDATE17 is installed. User action: Install UPDATE19 to have all the latest kits. Scenario-4: UPDATE16 is not installed on the system but other UPDATE kits are installed. User action: Install UPDATE19 to have all the latest kits.

In article <h1igbm$tm2$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de says...> > In article <MPG.24a5e28a460dda7d98969b@news.verizon.net>, John Santos > <john@egh.com> writes: > > > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, > > > one needs 19 only IF ONE NEEDS THE PATCHES IT INCLUDES WHICH ONE DOES > > > NOT HAVE. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > > > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > > > > > This is most definitely not true. V18 and V19 contain lots of other > > updates that were *not* in V17. > > The upper-case stuff shows that we agree. "In particular" does not mean the same thing as "for example." It means (according the the American Heritage Dictionary 4th edition), "specifically". That was the phrase I had a problem with. (... with which I had a problem?) :-) Sorry to be so pedantic, but I can imagine someone doing a Google search, seeing this thread, and thinking "I've got Update 17 and Graphics installed, so my problem must be something else" and not pursuing it further, when in fact their problem is solved by one of the other ECO's bundled into Update 18/19. -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.

In article <MPG.24acc9044edc6a9398969c@news.verizon.net>, John Santos <john@egh.com> writes: > In article <h1igbm$tm2$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de > says...> > > In article <MPG.24a5e28a460dda7d98969b@news.verizon.net>, John Santos > > <john@egh.com> writes: > > > > > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, > > > > one needs 19 only IF ONE NEEDS THE PATCHES IT INCLUDES WHICH ONE DOES > > > > NOT HAVE. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > > > > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > > > > > > > > This is most definitely not true. V18 and V19 contain lots of other > > > updates that were *not* in V17. > > > > The upper-case stuff shows that we agree. > > "In particular" does not mean the same thing as "for example." It > means (according the the American Heritage Dictionary 4th edition), > "specifically". That was the phrase I had a problem with. (... with > which I had a problem?) :-) > > Sorry to be so pedantic, but I can imagine someone doing a Google > search, seeing this thread, and thinking "I've got Update 17 and > Graphics installed, so my problem must be something else" and > not pursuing it further, when in fact their problem is solved by > one of the other ECO's bundled into Update 18/19. See my last sentence above. If one has Update 17 and Graphics 6, then Updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new.

In article <h21pir$g42$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de says...> > In article <MPG.24acc9044edc6a9398969c@news.verizon.net>, John Santos > <john@egh.com> writes: > > > In article <h1igbm$tm2$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de > > says...> > > > In article <MPG.24a5e28a460dda7d98969b@news.verizon.net>, John Santos > > > <john@egh.com> writes: > > > > > > > > To summarise: one needs 19 if one has 17 or 18 but not 16. Otherwise, > > > > > one needs 19 only IF ONE NEEDS THE PATCHES IT INCLUDES WHICH ONE DOES > > > > > NOT HAVE. In particular, if one has VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 and > > > > > VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0, then updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is most definitely not true. V18 and V19 contain lots of other > > > > updates that were *not* in V17. > > > > > > The upper-case stuff shows that we agree. > > > > "In particular" does not mean the same thing as "for example." It > > means (according the the American Heritage Dictionary 4th edition), > > "specifically". That was the phrase I had a problem with. (... with > > which I had a problem?) :-) > > > > Sorry to be so pedantic, but I can imagine someone doing a Google > > search, seeing this thread, and thinking "I've got Update 17 and > > Graphics installed, so my problem must be something else" and > > not pursuing it further, when in fact their problem is solved by > > one of the other ECO's bundled into Update 18/19. > > See my last sentence above. If one has Update 17 and Graphics 6, then > Updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. Oh, you mean "Nothing new", and all the other ECO's I explicitly listed (twice now) don't count, even though they are not included in either Graphics 6 or Update 17? BTW, several of these are Installation Rating 1. -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.

In article <MPG.24b091ce3586874f98969e@news.verizon.net>, John Santos <john@egh.com> writes: > > See my last sentence above. If one has Update 17 and Graphics 6, then > > Updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > Oh, you mean "Nothing new", and all the other ECO's I explicitly listed > (twice now) don't count, even though they are not included in either > Graphics 6 or Update 17? > > BTW, several of these are Installation Rating 1. I might be mistaken, but I was assuming: Update 18 is Update 17 + Graphics 6 (I remember asking myself why there was an update for just one additional patch) but has the technical problem this thread is about while Update 19 corrects this technical problem. I might be wrong; I'll have another look. Again, it would be nice if, at the beginning of each patch description, right after the checksum stuff, it said "The following patches are included in this update but not in the previous update".

In article <h27boq$1ck$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > > > See my last sentence above. If one has Update 17 and Graphics 6, then > > > Updates 18 and 19 provide nothing new. > > > > Oh, you mean "Nothing new", and all the other ECO's I explicitly listed > > (twice now) don't count, even though they are not included in either > > Graphics 6 or Update 17? > > > > BTW, several of these are Installation Rating 1. > > I might be mistaken, but I was assuming: Update 18 is Update 17 + > Graphics 6 (I remember asking myself why there was an update for just > one additional patch) but has the technical problem this thread is about > while Update 19 corrects this technical problem. > > I might be wrong; I'll have another look. > > Again, it would be nice if, at the beginning of each patch description, > right after the checksum stuff, it said "The following patches are > included in this update but not in the previous update". Sorry for the confusion, my mistake. 18 and 19 do contain several patches not in 17: VMS732_DELETE-V0100 and VMS732_NETACP-V0100, being version 1, are not in 17 at all, and 7 others have the same names but newer versions than in 17. However (and this is the reason for my confusion) most of these appeared before update 17 itself did (thus I was assuming that anything new in 18 would have to have appeared after 17, but this is not the case) and a few appeared shortly after, so anyone who has installed update 17 AND ALL OTHER PATCHES WHICH WERE RELEASED JUST SHORTLY AFTER IT as well as Graphics 6 does NOT need to install 19. (That is, update 17 and all individual patches released before update 18 brings one completely up to date. Of these, just a couple were released after update 17.) Thus, anyone who, like me, has something like the following: DEC AXPVMS VMS732_SYS V17.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_SHADOWING V7.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_NETACP V1.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_MAILSHR V2.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_IPC V3.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_GRAPHICS V6.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_FIBRE_SCSI V16.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_DRIVER V4.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_DELETE V1.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 DEC AXPVMS VMS732_UPDATE V17.0 Patch Install 03-MAY-2009 that is, o update 17 o all patches which were available on 03-MAY-2009 does not need to install 19, since the new stuff in 18 (and 19) was all available on 03-MAY-2009. So, my mistake was assuming that an update patch contains all patches previously released, but this is not the case.