f



SCSI tape not working after upgrade 5.0.5 -> 5.0.7

Good day,

After an upgrade of SCO OpenServer 5.0.5 running on Dell PowerEdge 2400 to 
5.0.7 we found the tape drive does not work. In "mkdev tape", when you go
view the installed tape drives it lists none. But if you try to create a new
one, it can't:

---snip---
You are about to add the following SCSI device:

      Host              Adapter
Type  Adapter  Device   Number  ID      LUN     Bus
-------------------------------------------------------
SCSI  alad     tape     0       6       0       0

Update SCSI configuration? (y/n) y

Cannot add this tape.
Another tape is already configured at this location.

SCSI configuration files not updated.
---snip---

If I try to remove a SCSI tape, it says there aren't any. Yes, the SCSI 
details are correct. The device is plugged in and working properly - just 
before the upgrade a full backup was done, and verified too. The device 
details appear correctly in the mscsi file, the kernel was relinked.

Some random bits of information about the system follow:

# uname -a
SCO_SV phmas 3.2 5.0.7 i386

# dmesg
<snip>
%Stp-0    -               -  -  Vnd=ARCHIVE Prd=Python 04106-XXX Rev=7350

# sconf -v
Srom    alad    0       0       5       0
Stp     alad    0       0       6       0
Sdsk    perc    0       0       0       0
unknown perc    0       0       6       0

# ls -l /dev/*ct0
crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrct0
crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rct0
crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xct0

# ls -l /dev/*Stp0
crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrStp0
crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rStp0
crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xStp0

# tar tvf /dev/xct0
tar: cannot open: /dev/xct0

# cat /dev/xct0
cat: cannot open /dev/xct0: Device busy (error 16)

What am I missing?

Best regards,
Pavel

--
Pavel Tcholakov
Technology Systems Integration (Pty) Ltd.
Email: pavel!tsi.co.za  Tel: +27.11.792.1094
0
pavel8605 (2)
9/16/2003 8:47:36 AM
comp.unix.sco.misc 3925 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

5 Replies
933 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 3

hello



the information you send shows that another device is

using the 0 0 6 0 identificator



look for the file mscsi in the hd and delete the line



unknown perc    0       0       6       0



and reboot system



good luck







Originally posted by Pavel Tcholakov 

> Good day,

>

> After an upgrade of SCO OpenServer 5.0.5 running on Dell
> PowerEdge 2400 to

> 5..7 we found the tape drive does not work. In "mkdev tape", when
>   you go

> view the installed tape drives it lists none. But if you try to
> create a new

> one, it can't:

>

> ---snip---

> You are about to add the following SCSI device:

>

>       Host              Adapter

> Type  Adapter  Device   Number  ID      LUN     Bus

> -------------------------------------------------------

> SCSI  alad     tape     0       6       0       0

>

> Update SCSI configuration? (y/n) y

>

> Cannot add this tape.

> Another tape is already configured at this location.

>

> SCSI configuration files not updated.

> ---snip---

>

> If I try to remove a SCSI tape, it says there aren't any. Yes,
> the SCSI

> details are correct. The device is plugged in and working
> properly - just

> before the upgrade a full backup was done, and verified too.
> The device

> details appear correctly in the mscsi file, the kernel was relinked.

>

> Some random bits of information about the system follow:

>

> # uname -a

> SCO_SV phmas 3.2 5.0.7 i386

>

> # dmesg

> <snip>

> %Stp-0    -               -  -  Vnd=ARCHIVE Prd=Python 04106-XXX
> Rev=7350

>

> # sconf -v

> Srom    alad    0       0       5       0

> Stp     alad    0       0       6       0

> Sdsk    perc    0       0       0       0

> unknown perc    0       0       6       0

>

> # ls -l /dev/*ct0

> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrct0

> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rct0

> crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xct0

>

> # ls -l /dev/*Stp0

> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrStp0

> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rStp0

> crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xStp0

>

> # tar tvf /dev/xct0

> tar: cannot open: /dev/xct0

>

> # cat /dev/xct0

> cat: cannot open /dev/xct0: Device busy (error 16)

>

> What am I missing?

>

> Best regards,

> Pavel

>

> --

> Pavel Tcholakov

> Technology Systems Integration (Pty) Ltd.

Email: pavel!tsi.co.za  Tel: +27.11.792.1094 


--
Posted via http://dbforums.com
0
9/16/2003 9:56:16 AM
On 16 Sep 2003 01:47:36 -0700, pavel@tsi.co.za (Pavel Tcholakov)
wrote:

>Good day,
>
>After an upgrade of SCO OpenServer 5.0.5 running on Dell PowerEdge 2400 to 
>5.0.7 we found the tape drive does not work. In "mkdev tape", when you go
>view the installed tape drives it lists none. But if you try to create a new
>one, it can't:
>
>---snip---
>You are about to add the following SCSI device:
>
>      Host              Adapter
>Type  Adapter  Device   Number  ID      LUN     Bus
>-------------------------------------------------------
>SCSI  alad     tape     0       6       0       0
>
>Update SCSI configuration? (y/n) y
>
>Cannot add this tape.
>Another tape is already configured at this location.
>
>SCSI configuration files not updated.
>---snip---
>
>If I try to remove a SCSI tape, it says there aren't any. Yes, the SCSI 
>details are correct. The device is plugged in and working properly - just 
>before the upgrade a full backup was done, and verified too. The device 
>details appear correctly in the mscsi file, the kernel was relinked.
>
>Some random bits of information about the system follow:
>
># uname -a
>SCO_SV phmas 3.2 5.0.7 i386
>
># dmesg
><snip>
>%Stp-0    -               -  -  Vnd=ARCHIVE Prd=Python 04106-XXX Rev=7350
>
># sconf -v
>Srom    alad    0       0       5       0
>Stp     alad    0       0       6       0
>Sdsk    perc    0       0       0       0
>unknown perc    0       0       6       0
>
># ls -l /dev/*ct0
>crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrct0
>crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rct0
>crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xct0
>
># ls -l /dev/*Stp0
>crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrStp0
>crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rStp0
>crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xStp0
>
># tar tvf /dev/xct0
>tar: cannot open: /dev/xct0
>
># cat /dev/xct0
>cat: cannot open /dev/xct0: Device busy (error 16)
>
>What am I missing?
>
>Best regards,
>Pavel
>
>--
>Pavel Tcholakov
>Technology Systems Integration (Pty) Ltd.
>Email: pavel!tsi.co.za  Tel: +27.11.792.1094


This TA may help:

Go to

http://support.caldera.com/rn_cgi/partneronline.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php?p_li=&p_sp=

and search for TA # 110973

DDinAZ


0
ddinaz (65)
9/16/2003 11:17:09 AM
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:56:16 -0400, scofan <member35788@dbforums.com>
wrote:


>Originally posted by Pavel Tcholakov 
>> Good day,
>>
>> After an upgrade of SCO OpenServer 5.0.5 running on Dell
>> PowerEdge 2400 to
>> 5..7 we found the tape drive does not work. In "mkdev tape", when
>>   you go
>> view the installed tape drives it lists none. But if you try to
>> create a new
>> one, it can't:
>>
>> ---snip---
>> You are about to add the following SCSI device:
>>
>>       Host              Adapter
>> Type  Adapter  Device   Number  ID      LUN     Bus
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> SCSI  alad     tape     0       6       0       0
>>
>> Update SCSI configuration? (y/n) y
>>
>> Cannot add this tape.
>> Another tape is already configured at this location.
>>
>> SCSI configuration files not updated.
>> ---snip---
>>
>> If I try to remove a SCSI tape, it says there aren't any. Yes,
>> the SCSI
>> details are correct. The device is plugged in and working
>> properly - just
>> before the upgrade a full backup was done, and verified too.
>> The device
>> details appear correctly in the mscsi file, the kernel was relinked.
>>
>> Some random bits of information about the system follow:
>>
>> # uname -a
>> SCO_SV phmas 3.2 5.0.7 i386
>>
>> # dmesg
>> <snip>
>> %Stp-0    -               -  -  Vnd=ARCHIVE Prd=Python 04106-XXX
>> Rev=7350
>>
>> # sconf -v
>> Srom    alad    0       0       5       0
>> Stp     alad    0       0       6       0
>> Sdsk    perc    0       0       0       0
>> unknown perc    0       0       6       0
>>
>> # ls -l /dev/*ct0
>> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrct0
>> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rct0
>> crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xct0
>>
>> # ls -l /dev/*Stp0
>> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  8 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/nrStp0
>> crw-rw-rw-   5 root     root      46,  0 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/rStp0
>> crw-rw-rw-   3 root     root      46,128 Sep 15 17:43 /dev/xStp0
>>
>> # tar tvf /dev/xct0
>> tar: cannot open: /dev/xct0
>>
>> # cat /dev/xct0
>> cat: cannot open /dev/xct0: Device busy (error 16)
>>
>> What am I missing?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Pavel
>>

<top-post flipped>
>
>hello
>
>
>the information you send shows that another device is
>
>using the 0 0 6 0 identificator

Nope, that's on a completely different controller (perc vs. alad),
although I'm curious as to what is sitting at ID 6 on the Perc
controller that is identified as 'unknown'.  I've only seen that when
I have an autoloader installed.


>look for the file mscsi in the hd and delete the line
>
>unknown perc    0       0       6       0

Look into the mscsi file for the 'Stp' entr[y,ies], as well as the
other files noted in the TA mentioned by Dave Dickerson.  We
experienced this same type of problem on a 5.0.4 -> 5.0.6(?) upgrade -
Removed all tape entries in the files mentioned in the TA, relinked,
rebooted, then re-created our tape devices.  Worked like a champ.

>
>and reboot system
>
>
>
>good luck


Scott McMillan

0
smcm (146)
9/16/2003 12:59:38 PM
As suggested by fellow posters, removing the Stp entry from the 
/etc/conf/cf.d/mscsi file and doing "mkdev tape" again fixed it. The entry
in there must have been left over from 5.0.5 and subsequently prevented the
mkdev utility from functioning properly.

Thanks to everybody who replied :-)

P.S. I don't know what's the unknown device on ID 6 on the perc controller,
and I have no physical access to the machine so I can't check. All I know is
ID 0 on that host adapter is a RAID array of 6 separate disks.
0
pavel8605 (2)
9/17/2003 12:50:23 PM
"Pavel Tcholakov" <pavel@tsi.co.za> wrote in message
news:a117c791.0309170450.3785d409@posting.google.com...
> As suggested by fellow posters, removing the Stp entry from the
> /etc/conf/cf.d/mscsi file and doing "mkdev tape" again fixed it. The entry
> in there must have been left over from 5.0.5 and subsequently prevented
the
> mkdev utility from functioning properly.
>
> Thanks to everybody who replied :-)
>
> P.S. I don't know what's the unknown device on ID 6 on the perc
controller,
> and I have no physical access to the machine so I can't check. All I know
is
> ID 0 on that host adapter is a RAID array of 6 separate disks.

Is there a hotswap SCSI backplane ?  Intel and others use ID 6 for the
backplanes ID.


0
9/17/2003 2:10:47 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Upgrading 5.0.5 to 5.0.6/5.0.7
Hi, I've inheirited 3 SCO Servers and need to upgrade one to 5.0.6 from 5.0.5. The other two are at 5.0.6 and I want them all in line. Some questions: 1. Does SCO charge for this upgrade? If so, how much? 2. How easy is the upgrade? 3. Should I go to 5.0.7 instead for all the machines? Thanks, Jon Jon Wynacht typed (on Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 09:16:17AM -0700): | Hi, | | I've inheirited 3 SCO Servers and need to upgrade one to 5.0.6 from | 5.0.5. The other two are at 5.0.6 and I want them all in line. Some | questions: | | 1. Does SCO charge for this upgrade? If so, how much? >From 5.0.5 Enterprise to 5.0.7 Enterprise, $599. >From 5.0.6 Enterprise to 5.0.7 Enterprise, $369. | 2. How easy is the upgrade? Not hard; be sure to use ftp.jpr.com/pub/savefiles. | 3. Should I go to 5.0.7 instead for all the machines? Yes, and when you order the upgrades, also add in SCO Update, which will eventually bring you all the changes that bring you the Legend release. -- JP Jon Wynacht wrote: > Hi, > > I've inheirited 3 SCO Servers and need to upgrade one to 5.0.6 from > 5.0.5. The other two are at 5.0.6 and I want them all in line. Some > questions: > > 1. Does SCO charge for this upgrade? If so, how much? Of course. See http://aplawrence.com/scoprices.html > 2. How easy is the upgrade? Usually painless, but see http://aplawrence.com/Unixart/upgrades.html > 3. Should I go to 5.0.7 instead for all the machines? Yes, no questi...

Upgrade OSR 5.0.5 to 5.0.6 or 5.0.7
Hi all, I've two olds servers DELL Poweredge 2300 with Raid PERC, funtionning with OSR 5.0.5. Iwant upgrade the OS to 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 but it seems (sco.com) that the poweredge 2300 is bnot supported after OSR 5.0.5 (Hardware comptatibility). has somebody attempt this with success and which drivers (Raid PERC, Adaptec) are used. Thank you in advance fir the help. ----------------------------------------------------- Andre Georgel Email : andre.georgel@noos.fr "La perfection n'est pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus rien � ajouter, mais lorsque qu'il n'y a plus rien � enlever." "Perfection is not when there is nothing to add, but when there is nothing to remove." (A. de Saint Exupery) ------------------------------------------------------ On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:25:06 +0000, Andre Georgel <andre.georgel@mareduspam.com> wrote: >Hi all, > >I've two olds servers DELL Poweredge 2300 with Raid PERC, funtionning >with OSR 5.0.5. > >Iwant upgrade the OS to 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 but it seems (sco.com) that the >poweredge 2300 is bnot supported after OSR 5.0.5 (Hardware >comptatibility). > >has somebody attempt this with success and which drivers (Raid PERC, >Adaptec) are used. > >Thank you in advance fir the help. > >----------------------------------------------------- >Andre Georgel > >Email : andre.georgel@noos.fr > >"La perfection n'est pas lorsqu'il n'y a plus...

Looking for precompiled 'rsync" for SCO 5.0.5, 5.0.6 and 5.0.7
I was recommended to use 'rsync' for multi-site transfers. But I have come to find that "rsync" does not exist already in OpenServer 5.0.5, 5.0.6 and 5.0.7. You can only get the "source" files which you "must" compile in order to create the "rsync." These seems to require that you compile these on every level of OpenServer you need. Where / how can I get the 'rsync' binaries already compiled for the levels I need? smlunatick typed (on Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:10:53AM -0700): | I was recommended to use 'rsync' for multi-site transfers. But I have | come to find that "rsync" does not exist already in OpenServer 5.0.5, | 5.0.6 and 5.0.7. You can only get the "source" files which you "must" | compile in order to create the "rsync." These seems to require that | you compile these on every level of OpenServer you need. | | Where / how can I get the 'rsync' binaries already compiled for the | levels I need? Get a binary for OSR 5.0.7, and with oss646c, it should run on 5.0.4, 5.0.5, and 5.0.6. Binary afavilable on Brian White's page at www.aljex.com/bkw. -- JP On Aug 18, 7:37=A0pm, Jean-Pierre Radley <j...@jpr.com> wrote: > smlunatick typed (on Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:10:53AM -0700): > | I was recommended to use 'rsync' for multi-site transfers. =A0But I hav= e > | come to find that "rsync" does not exist already in OpenSer...

Upgrading 5.0.5 Host To 5.0.7 Enterprise
Hello, What are the flaming hoops I need to jump through to upgrade a 5.0.5 Host to 5.0.7 Enterprise? I've tried to do some net research on my own on this and it's darn confusing to a newbie to UNIX like myself. It looks like I have to first purchase an upgrade to 5.0.6 Host or 5.0.7 Host and then I can get a trade-in/upgrade to 5.0.7 Enterprise? WTF? Thanks for any help! Ian Motterman wrote: > Hello, > > What are the flaming hoops I need to jump through to upgrade > a 5.0.5 Host to 5.0.7 Enterprise? > > I've tried to do some net research on my own on this and it's darn confusing > to a newbie to UNIX like myself. It looks like I have to first purchase an > upgrade to 5.0.6 Host or 5.0.7 Host and then I can get a trade-in/upgrade > to 5.0.7 Enterprise? WTF? > It's less awful than it seems. The path is indeed upgrade to 5.0.7 host and then upgrade that to Enterprise. In practice, the first upgrade is the one where things can go wrong (if at all) and the second is trivial. -- Tony Lawrence > Thanks for any help! > > Ian ...

Sco OpenServer upgrading 5.0.6 to 5.0.7
I need some help. I need to upgrade my Sco O.S.506 to 507 and told me that I need to reinstall all the operative system and not the upgrading of it. Is it true ? Thanks in advance and excuse me if before someone alredy answered this query but I do not find anything about this matter bye Roberto Pineapple typed (on Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 01:39:46PM +0200): | I need some help. | I need to upgrade my Sco O.S.506 to 507 and told me that I need to reinstall | all the operative system and not the upgrading of it. | Is it true ? No. | Thanks in advance and excuse me if before someone alredy answered this query | but I do not find anything about this matter While In-Place Upgrades do now work considerably better than they did a few years ago, I *still* counsel against them. Use my savefiles script, make good backups, and then a fresh install. -- JP "Pineapple" <roberquaNO@SPAMvirgilio.it> wrote in message news:<c50pa5$vri$1@newsreader.mailgate.org>... > I need some help. > I need to upgrade my Sco O.S.506 to 507 and told me that I need to reinstall > all the operative system and not the upgrading of it. > Is it true ? > Thanks in advance and excuse me if before someone alredy answered this query > but I do not find anything about this matter > > bye > Roberto I had same problem, and I was unable to upgrade . Only fresh reinstall was Ok. Pineapple <roberquaNO@spamvirgilio.it> wrote: >I need some help. >I need to...

In-Place Upgrade of SCO OpenServer 5.0.4 to 5.0.7
I will attempt this upgrade in a few days. Has anyone on this forum done this? Any pitfalls? Any problems? I checked SCO's tech article data base and found articles 11293 ("An in-place upgrade from OpenServer 5.0.4 to 5.0.5 and then on to 5.06 fails"), 112523 ("I upgraded from OpenServer 5.0.x to OpenServer 5.0.6 and my files from /usr/local are missing"), 105664 ("The Internet FastStart package did not install after an in-place upgrade to OpenServer Enterprise Release 5.0.4 or 5.0.5"), and 11542 ("I get kernel relink errors when trying to install Merge 5 on SCO OpenServer 5"). Are these various problems fixed with 5.0.7? Are there any other tech articles I should be aware of? Regards, Ronald W. Satz SCO UNIX Authorized and Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer Transpower Corporation transpower@aol.com www.transpowercorp.com Transpower <transpower@aol.com> wrote: >I will attempt this upgrade in a few days. Has anyone on this forum done this? Well, in my opinion that's too far back for an IPU. It might very well work, but 5.0.4 is pretty ancient and you are bound to have accumulated a lot of cruft over the years. I'd fresh install: http://aplawrence.com/Unixart/upgrades.html -- tony@aplawrence.com Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com Get paid for writing about tech: http://aplawrence.com/publish.html ...

Licensing question 5.0.4 - 5.0.6
We need to upgrade a backup server from 5.0.4 to 5.0.6 (same as live server). Our supplier told us that a base pack upgrade for 5.0.6 is not available and we would have to have 5.0.7. This version of Sco is not certified compatible with our server. Does anyone know if we can install 5.0.7 licences on 5.0.6? Also it feels like the supplier is telling stories to force us into buying a new server. Does anyone know if 5.0.6 base packs are available? Thanks for your help Regards BB p.s. anonymity preserved to prevent Spam. Bigbyte typed (on Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 04:22:53PM +0100): | We need to upgrade a backup server from 5.0.4 to 5.0.6 (same as live | server). Our supplier told us that a base pack upgrade for 5.0.6 is not | available and we would have to have 5.0.7. This version of Sco is not | certified compatible with our server. Does anyone know if we can install | 5.0.7 licences on 5.0.6? No. But why would you want to? | Also it feels like the supplier is telling stories to force us into buying a | new server. Does anyone know if 5.0.6 base packs are available? What do you mean by a "base pack"? -- JP On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Bigbyte wrote: > We need to upgrade a backup server from 5.0.4 to 5.0.6 (same as live > server). Our supplier told us that a base pack upgrade for 5.0.6 is not > available and we would have to have 5.0.7. This version of Sco is not > certified compatible with our server. Does anyone know if we can install > 5.0.7 licenc...

NFS SCo 5.0.5 with SCO 6.0.0
Hi everybody, I have a folder on SCO 5.0.5 server shared through NFS with a new SCO 6.0.0 with MP2 server (converted from a SCO 5.0.6 version). Before conversion file locks (over network) on this folder works well (eg from server SCO 5.0.6 I was able to see locks generated from SCO 5.0.5 box and viceversa), now with SCO 6.0.0 does not work ! I see that on SCO 6.0.0 the lockd daemon is active .. so it should work ... Please can you help me ? Thanks Cuffiette ...

SCO Caldera v3.2.5.07 and Enterprise 5.0.7 3.2v5.0.7
I have 2 different software applications. We are considering moving both to a single server sunning sco. One vendor says they will only run on SCO caldera v 3.2.2.07 the other says they will only run on enterprise 5.0.7 3.2v5.0.7 I am confused, are these 2 different os's or just versions of the same os. Can someone enlighten me? gerard typed (on Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 11:34:45AM -0800): | I have 2 different software applications. | We are considering moving both to a single server sunning sco. | One vendor says they will only run on SCO caldera v 3.2.2.07 There is no such version as 3.2.2.07. | the other says they will only run on enterprise 5.0.7 3.2v5.0.7 This is the latest release of SCO Openserver. -- JP gerardm@schurmans.com (gerard) wrote in message news:<97c6f92f.0310311134.2227a2c@posting.google.com>... > I have 2 different software applications. > We are considering moving both to a single server sunning sco. > One vendor says they will only run on SCO caldera v 3.2.2.07 > the other says they will only run on enterprise 5.0.7 3.2v5.0.7 > > I am confused, are these 2 different os's or just versions of the same os. > Can someone enlighten me? They both are the same, SCO UNIX 3.2V5.7 (enterprise). Abid ...

SYbase SQL & SCO OpenServer 5.0.4/5.0.5
Can somone help me with wich SQL versions runs on SCO OSR5.0.4 and SCO OSR 5.0.5? So your the customer SCO still has :-) Sorry.. Couldn't resist ! ASE 10.0.2 was certified on SCO OSR5.0.2 with OS patches SLS 422a, SLS 437a. It wasn't certified on anything higher. ASE 11.0.x was certified on 5.0.4, but nothing higher. Sybase doesn't support 10.x or 11.x any more ...

Should I fear an upgrade from 5.0 to.. 5.1 or 5.5 on a CentOS box?
I've just been handed a CentOS 5.1 , WHM/Cpanel server to maintain, it's running MySQL 5.0 which powers a few Forum/CMS type sites.. I really need to upgrade MySQL, because until I do, WHM/CPanel upgrades aren't possible.. How scary is this? Likelyhood of scripts like SMF, Wordpress etc breaking? How much time involved? Minutes, hours days? Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance On 11/6/2013 2:26 PM, dewed wrote: > I've just been handed a CentOS 5.1 , WHM/Cpanel server to maintain, it's running MySQL 5.0 which powers a few Fo...

SCO 5.0.5/5.0.6 bios clock, time zone and synching
Hi All, Does SCO expect the BIOS clock to be set to UTC? Ive got a few SCO boxen spread across a couple of time zones and at the moment, the bios clocks in the servers are set to localtime not UTC. The timezone settings in SCO Admin are also wrong. I was under the impression *nix always expects the BIOS clock to be set to UTC and then the timezone settings in SCO tell the OS what the local time is. This does not seem to be the case for me. On a testing box, Ive set the BIOS clock to UTC, set the correct timezone in scoadmin but the date command in a root shell still gives the wrong time. Either the timezone information in scoadmin for my timezone is wrong and I need to set up an unlisted timezone (which I can do easily enough) or im missing something more fundamental here. Anyone care to wield a clue-bat? cheers John Smith wrote: > Does SCO expect the BIOS clock to be set to UTC? > > Ive got a few SCO boxen spread across a couple of time zones and at > the moment, the bios clocks in the servers are set to localtime not > UTC. > The timezone settings in SCO Admin are also wrong. > > I was under the impression *nix always expects the BIOS clock to be > set to UTC and then the timezone settings in SCO tell the OS what the > local time is. > This does not seem to be the case for me. > On a testing box, Ive set the BIOS clock to UTC, set the correct > timezone in scoadmin but the date command in a root shell still gives > the wro...

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
Time for a new Cartoon character sock - no? On 8/16/11 1:16 PM, Redjak wrote: > Time for a new cartoon character sock, no? Any suggestions Olive Oyl? "Chance Furlong" wrote in message news:a9idnQpR6J6abtfTnZ2dnUVZ_u6dnZ2d@giganews.com... On 8/16/11 1:16 PM, Redjak wrote: > Time for a new cartoon character sock, no? >Any suggestions Olive Oyl? Yeah - something stupid, as usual. ...

SCO OSR 5.0.5 SCSI Tape Drive Issues
I've just recently done a fresh installation of SCO OSR 3.2v5.0.5 and am having problems with my HP C1537A SCSI Tape Drive. All the hardware is new but for some reason the tape drive keeps acting up. If I go into single-user maintenance mode, the drive has no problems. As soon as I get into multi-user mode, I sometimes get this error: NOTICE: Stp: SCSI tape 0 device 46/8 offline. As-soon-as I get this though, the drive starts working nornally, otherwise it won't work at all. I've done a re-installation of my controller cards drivers and still no-go. Here's a listing of some reports I've run on this machine: ************************************************** hwconfig -h device address vec dma comment ====== ======= === === ======= kernel - - - rel=3.2v5.0.5 kid=98/07/02 cpu - - - unit=1 family=15 cpuid - - - unit=1 vend=GenuineIntel tfms=0:15:3:4 fpu - 13 - unit=1 type=80387-compatible pci 0xcf8-0xcff - - am=1 sc=0 buses=7 PnP - - - nodes=0 serial 0x3f8-0x3ff 4 - unit=0 type=Standard nports=1 fifo=yes console - - - unit=vga type=0 12 screens=68k floppy 0x3f2-0x3f7 6 2 unit=0 type=135ds18 adapter 0xe000-0xe080 10 - type=lsil ha=0 id=7 Chip=1030 10328 adapter 0xd000-0xd080 5 - type=lsil ha=1 id=7 Chip=1030 10328 cd-...

5.0.5: uname -a shows 5.0.6 ?!
Hello, where gets "uname -a" the 5.0.6 info ? uname -a: SCO_SV hostname 3.2 5.0.6 i386 uname -X: System = SCO_SV Node = hostname Release = 3.2v5.0.5 KernelID = 98/07/02 Machine = PentII(D) BusType = ISA Serial = 4FI018581 Users = 130-user OEM# = 0 Origin# = 1 NumCPU = 2 truss doesn't helps. Regards, S.Marquardt Stefan Marquardt wrote: > where gets "uname -a" the 5.0.6 info ? > uname -a: > > SCO_SV hostname 3.2 5.0.6 i386 > > uname -X: > > System = SCO_SV > Node = hostname > Release = 3.2v5.0.5 > KernelID = 98/07/02 > Machine = PentII(D) > BusType = ISA > Serial = 4FI018581 > Users = 130-user > OEM# = 0 > Origin# = 1 > NumCPU = 2 > > truss doesn't helps. `uname -a` uses the uname(S) system call; `uname -X` uses __scoinfo(S). You can see the respective structures by doing: # scodb scodb> d &utsname scodb> d &scoutsname scodb> q The structures are initialized in /etc/conf/pack.d/kernel/space.c. `uname -v` comes from VER, which is #defined in kernel/space.c; `uname -X` Release comes from SCORELEASE, which is #defined in /etc/conf/cf.d/version.h. You can see how the two could get out of sync. >Bela< ...

Sybase and Openserver 5.0.4/5.0.5
Can somone give me information about what Sybase Sql version that runs on OSR5.0.4 and OSR5.0.5 etc? ...

if time = 3 seconds, how do i set the values of the time steps 0,0.1,0.2,0.3,0.5,1.0,1.5,2.0,3.0,5.0 to -9999 from time =3 seconds
Hi &nbsp; I have 18 inputs (arrays) which contain certain statistics and if time&nbsp;&nbsp;= 3 seconds, set the values of time step 5.0 to -9999.0. &nbsp; I was wondering if there is an efficient way to do this without using a lot of case statements? &nbsp; Thank you. Hello AdrianT, it's not really clear to me what you want to do... I suspect: you have an array containing values and you want to output them with a fixed timing of 3 seconds: you should use a for loop autoindexing trough your array and sending the value to your indicator/output/whatever. Put a "wait for next multiple" into your for loop. Or do you want to have a minimum time delay of 3 seconds? Again use a for loop, get the time value and use a InRange&amp;Coerce with minimum set to 3 seconds... Or you should explain more precisely what you need... Hi Thanks for that. Let me explain. &nbsp; The time may vary. Let me give an example. if time&nbsp; = 2.1, I want to set the time step's &nbsp;3.0 and 5.0's values to -9999.0. if the time =0.1 seconds then I want to set 0.2,0.3, 0.5 etc values to -9999.0 etc .................................................................... &nbsp; Can you please help? Thank you. Hello TUDS, do you use different accounts/nicknames ? Well, that's easy, at least for a sorted array: Search for your time-value in the array (Threshold 1D array). Fill all elements from that index till the end with your "error...

[ANN] Rails 0.7.0, Action Pack 0.8.5, Active Record 0.9.5
I gather that most people are now familar with the RoR suite, so I'm skipping the formal introductions and will just bring you the meat. Get it all from http://www.rubyonrails.org, talk it up on #rubyonrails (FreeNet). Or even easier, just do "gem install rails" (or "gem update" if you're already running on Gem Rails) -- you'll automatically install all the newest versions of the required dependencies. Rails 0.7.0: Fixed WEBrick, new_model generator, easier fixtures ================================================================ The WEBrick dispatch has...

SATA on 5.0.6 or 5.0.7?
Anyone running SCO 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 on servers with SATA drives? I'd like to hear from anyone with SATA based servers and if they met their exceptions for performance and reliability. In the past, I have always used SCSI drives for the performance and customary 5 year warrantee. Now SATA drives are available with 5 year warrantee and manufactures claim the drives are equivalent to SCSI performance at 40% less cost. I have checked my distributors and all the SATA drives I can find are 7200 RPM with the exception of the 36G WD360GD 10k RPM SATA drive. I have a request from a client running SCO 3.2v4.2 on 66 MHz 486 with 4G disk to upgrade to current hardware and OS. SCSI is overkill for this client and the 36G WD looks like a good choice. I'll eliminate all SCSI by using Backup Edge writing to a ATAPI DVD-RAM and upgrade the client to 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 (SCO's web site suggests it has upgrades to Enterprise 6.0 from Xenix/UNIX but there is no part number listed and inquiries come up: Not Available). -- Steve Fabac S.M. Fabac & Associates 816/765-1670 I have switched over most of my small server installs over to SATA raid using the intel SRCS16 raid controller and the 10K 36 gig raptor drives. So far other then one of the cables breaking off the connector during shipping, I have not had any probelms. On the smaller system running aro...

SCO 5.0.5 vs. 6.0
I'm having a new server built: SuperMicro P4SC8 Mother Board Intel P4 3.0Ghz 800 FSB 1GB CPU 73GB 10K 80 PIN SCSI Drive Sony 20/40GB DAT Drive SDT11000/BN DDS4 Adaptec 2010S Card for Mirroring Comtrol Rockport Card 99126-7 Is there any reason I should update my current version of SCO 5.0.5? Frank The following article is a recommendation from SCO when using P4 http://www.sco.com/ta/115963 "FrankS" <fshank@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:CqT_f.65026$H71.37215@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com... > I'm having a new server built: > > SuperMicro P4SC8 Mother Board > Intel P4 3.0Ghz 800 FSB 1GB CPU > 73GB 10K 80 PIN SCSI Drive > Sony 20/40GB DAT Drive SDT11000/BN DDS4 > > Adaptec 2010S Card for Mirroring > > Comtrol Rockport Card 99126-7 > > > > Is there any reason I should update my current version of SCO 5.0.5? > > > > Frank > > > > > > FrankS wrote: > I'm having a new server built: > > SuperMicro P4SC8 Mother Board > Intel P4 3.0Ghz 800 FSB 1GB CPU > 73GB 10K 80 PIN SCSI Drive > Sony 20/40GB DAT Drive SDT11000/BN DDS4 > > Adaptec 2010S Card for Mirroring > > Comtrol Rockport Card 99126-7 > > > > Is there any reason I should update my current version of SCO 5.0.5? Frank, OpenServer 5.0.5 is a retired product and is no longer generally supported by SCO. OpenServer 5.0.5 is not designed to work on P4 systems and y...

SCO OpenServer 5.0.4/5.0.5 New Daylight Savings dates
Has anyone yet come up with a solution on changing older SCO OpenServer 5.0.4 / 5.0.5 / 5.0.6 systems to accommodate the new daylight savings dates starting this year?? I have looked around at SCO's site and they have an update to install on 5.0.7 systems that also indicate you should install new libc, etc Anyone know how to fix this on older SCO OpenServer releases?? Thanks for any help Scott Ullmann Telespectrum sullmann@telespectrum.com scooter typed (on Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 12:37:58PM -0800): | Has anyone yet come up with a solution on changing older SCO OpenServer | 5.0.4 / 5.0.5 / 5.0.6 systems to accommodate the new daylight savings | dates starting this year?? | | I have looked around at SCO's site and they have an update to install | on 5.0.7 systems that also indicate you should install new libc, etc | | Anyone know how to fix this on older SCO OpenServer releases?? I'm in the EST timezone, and so I would edit /etc/TIMEZONE from: TZ=EST5EDT to: TZ=EST5EDT,M3,2,0/2,M11,1,0/2 -- JP ==> http://www.frappr.com/cusm <== On Jan 22, 4:24 pm, Jean-Pierre Radley <j...@jpr.com> wrote: > scooter typed (on Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 12:37:58PM -0800): > | Has anyone yet come up with a solution on changing older SCO OpenServer > | 5.0.4 / 5.0.5 / 5.0.6 systems to accommodate the new daylight savings > | dates starting this year?? > | > | I have looked around at SCO's site and they have an update to install > | on 5.0.7 ...

HP DLT Surestore 40 Scsi 3 Tape Drive SCO 5.0.5
I had a DLT drive fail on a SCO 5.0.5 machine with a Adatec 2940 scsi card. I am trying a new DLT Surestore drive, which has a SCSI 3 interface. The old one had a scsi 2 interface. The new drive does not work, it reports that the tape is write-protected. I have installed an updated Stp Driver as supplied on the Microlite web site, and I can read tapes without any problems, but can not write any data. Has anyone else seen this. Is there a work around? Is this due to the new dlt drive only working in scsi 3 mode? If so, would a different adapter card make a difference? Why can I read but not write? Any help would be appreciated. "Cary Lewis" <cary.lewis@gmail.com> wrote in message news:5a64a2f0.0410290937.341a81eb@posting.google.com... >I had a DLT drive fail on a SCO 5.0.5 machine with a Adatec 2940 scsi > card. > > I am trying a new DLT Surestore drive, which has a SCSI 3 interface. > The old one had a scsi 2 interface. > > The new drive does not work, it reports that the tape is > write-protected. > > I have installed an updated Stp Driver as supplied on the Microlite > web site, and I can read tapes without any problems, but can not write > any data. > > Has anyone else seen this. Is there a work around? > > Is this due to the new dlt drive only working in scsi 3 mode? If so, > would a different adapter card make a difference? Why can I read but > not write? > > Any help would be appreciat...

Trying to compile putty-0.60 on SCO UNIX 5.0.7 with GCC and SCO Dev
I am trying to compile putty downloaded from http://linux.softpedia.com/progDownload/PuTTY-Download-347.html but get the error below. gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Werror -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DHAVE_X11 -DHAVE_X -DSYSV -Di386 -DS CO325 -D__SCO__ -DHAVE_XAW -DHAVE_SHAPE_EXT -DHAVE_SHAPE -DHAVE_SHM_EXT -DHAVE_X SHM -DHAVE_XCONVERTCASE -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr /include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/gl ib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/X11R6/include -I.././ -I../charset/ -I../windows/ -I../unix/ -I../mac/ -I../macosx/ -c ../ proxy.c cc1: warnings being treated as errors .../proxy.c: In function `proxy_for_destination': .../proxy.c:315: warning: implicit declaration of function `strncasecmp' gmake: *** [proxy.o] Error 1 # My programming skill level tops out at ./configure and make. Searching for instances of strncasecmp in the putty working directory shows: /tmp/putty-0.60/unix # cd .. # find . -type f -print | xargs grep strncasecmp | less ../mac/stricmp.c:#define strncasecmp strnicmp ../mac/stricmp.c:strncasecmp(s1, s2, n) ../unix/unix.h:#define strnicmp strncasecmp (END) In unix/unix.h: #define DEFAULT_CODEPAGE 0xFFFF #define CP_UTF8 CS_UTF8 /* from libcharset */ #define strnicmp strncasecmp #define stricmp strcasecmp /* BSD-semantics version of signal(), and another helpful function */ void (*putty_signal(int sig, void (*func)(int)))(int); void block_si...

Re: SATA on 5.0.6 or 5.0.7?
: "Steve M. Fabac, Jr." <smfabac@att.net> wrote in message : news:4325B488.908204F5@att.net... : > Anyone running SCO 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 on servers with : > SATA drives? : > : > I'd like to hear from anyone with SATA based servers and if : > they met their exceptions for performance and reliability. : > : > In the past, I have always used SCSI drives for the performance : > and customary 5 year warrantee. Now SATA drives are available with : > 5 year warrantee and manufactures claim the drives are equivalent : > to SCSI performance at 40% less cost. : > : > I have checked my distributors and all the SATA drives I can find : > are 7200 RPM with the exception of the 36G WD360GD 10k RPM SATA : > drive. : > : > I have a request from a client running SCO 3.2v4.2 on 66 MHz 486 : > with 4G disk to upgrade to current hardware and OS. : > : > SCSI is overkill for this client and the 36G WD looks like a : > good choice. I'll eliminate all SCSI by using Backup Edge : > writing to a ATAPI DVD-RAM and upgrade the client to : > 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 (SCO's web site suggests it has upgrades to : > Enterprise 6.0 from Xenix/UNIX but there is no part number : > listed and inquiries come up: Not Available). : > : > : > -- : > : > Steve Fabac : > S.M. Fabac & Associates : > ...

moving printers from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7
I have a whole lot of printers attached to ttys(specialix multi serial ports) on SCO 5.0.6, I am setting up a new server with 5.0.7 is there an easy way to move the printers configurations from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7 e,g Can I just copy /usr/spool/lp/*/lp from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7, would that make all my printers appear in 5.0.7 Many thanks denn.el@gmail.com typed (on Mon, May 21, 2007 at 06:39:27AM -0700): | I have a whole lot of printers attached to ttys(specialix multi serial | ports) on SCO 5.0.6, I am setting up a new server with 5.0.7 is there | an easy way to move the printers configurations from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7 | e,g Can I just copy /usr/spool/lp/*/lp from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7, would that | make all my printers appear in 5.0.7 I think I've done exactly that... -- JP ==> http://www.frappr.com/cusm <== On May 21, 5:54 pm, Jean-Pierre Radley <j...@jpr.com> wrote: > denn...@gmail.com typed (on Mon, May 21, 2007 at 06:39:27AM -0700): > | I have a whole lot of printers attached to ttys(specialix multi serial > | ports) on SCO 5.0.6, I am setting up a new server with 5.0.7 is there > | an easy way to move the printers configurations from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7 > | e,g Can I just copy /usr/spool/lp/*/lp from 5.0.6 to 5.0.7, would that > | make all my printers appear in 5.0.7 > > I think I've done exactly that... > > -- > JP > ==>http://www.frappr.com/cusm<== thanks ...

Web resources about - SCSI tape not working after upgrade 5.0.5 -> 5.0.7 - comp.unix.sco.misc

Working class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Working class (or lower class , labouring class, sometimes proletariat ) is a term used in the social sciences and in ordinary conversation to ...

Why PCC is working with delivery competitors Instacart and Amazon
PCC Natural Markets is doubling down on its delivery platform, giving customers who don't live near one of the brick-and-mortar stores more opportunities ...

"Does the way the presidential campaign is being conducted make you feel as though the election process ...
Gallup asked Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. Only 30% said yes, down from 46% in January. What accounts for this big drop? What ...

watch Nardwuar interview Anderson Paak about his punk roots, working with Dr. Dre & more
Nardwuar gifts Anderson .Paak with a Black Flag 7", and Anderson gives him a Cramps record in return.

Google is reportedly working on a new keyboard for Apple devices
This story was delivered to BI Intelligence Mobile Industry Insider subscribers. To learn more and subscribe, please click here . If you struggle ...

Woman guilty of working for years as unlicensed atty
Woman guilty of working for years as unlicensed atty

Google may quietly be working on rival to Amazon Echo
... to get in on the positive buzz surrounding the Amazon Echo, Google is reportedly building its own smart home device. Google is quietly working ...

Report: YouTube Working On Live-Streaming Video App
... and Facebook Live with its own foray into the live-streaming video world, according to a new report. Google’s video division is working on ...

Google is reportedly working on an Amazon Echo rival
Nest might not be building a challenger to the Amazon Echo, but that doesn't mean its sister company Google is standing idle. The Information's ...

Why McDonald's Is Working On A Loyalty Program?
Reports suggest that McDonald’s is developing a loyalty program in the U.S. that will be launched later this year or in early 2017, building ...

Resources last updated: 3/26/2016 1:31:18 PM