Re: 9.2.0.6 patchset failure

Billy wrote:
> hpuxrac wrote:
>
> > Here's what my ld and cc are point to apparently.
> >
> > > which ld
> > /usr/bin/ld
> > > which cc
> > /usr/bin/cc
>
> Same this side. But /usr/bin/cc is a symbolic link to /opt/ansic/bin/cc
> and /usr/bin/ld is a symbolic link to /usr/ccs/bin/ld.
>
> Anyway, after applying a set of HP-UX patches the problem was solved.
> What frustrates me to no end is that the make files show the exact
> *same* cc command (and +s parameter) working when I installed the
> Oracle patchset 9205. So there was nothing wrong until some bright
> spark decide to muck about with the compilers.
>
> It comes down to professionalism to me. When you touch a production
> box, you make sure that others are informed, that what you're touching
> will not screw up anything else, and you know what the friggen hell
> you're doing.
>
> Unfortunately, that in my experience is usually the exception as there
> is this cowboy attitude among many production support staff.
>
> --
> Billy

Sorry you are right of course that they are both symbolic links. Plus you have already solved the problem.

There are a bunch of tools available that can be used to track what executables have changed on a unix box but I am sure you know that already also.

After you get 9.2.0.6 on there are the security patches also. If RAC on hpux there are issues with the April one check out bug 4398539 I have had a tar open ... well a long time and still no fixee. Received on Fri Jun 17 2005 - 14:21:16 CDT