Re: How many problems are people finding in 9208 patchset?

hpuxrac wrote:
> dbaplusplus_at_hotmail.com wrote:
> > hpuxrac wrote:
> > > It looks like 2 bugs that will be filed out of what I have found so
> > > far.
> > >
> > > Both minor and probably both specific to hpux 64 bit install ( maybe
> > > that specific ).
> > >
> > > So we are proceeding along with testing and validating.
> > >
> > > Does anyone else think that perhaps a terminal release should come out
> > > "squeaky clean" and that we shouldn't have to file service requests
> > > that turn into bugs for things that were reported in prior patchsets?
> > >
> > > Or maybe that's a different world somewhere in a parallel universe.
> >
> > I am also looking in installaing 9.2.0.8 patch on HP UNIX 64 bit
> > production box. What HP UNIX bugs you are talking about? Where are they
> > documented?
>
> One is 5525139 which is kind of hinted at in the 7.3 readme post
> install that says "maybe" you might want to run changePerm.sh
>
> But there is no identification of what security exposures ( if any )
> you might get into by running changePerm.sh. There is only vague
> information that client side utilities and other software ( that needs
> to connect to oracle ) might not work if you don't run it.
>
> Do you run any batch stuff on your servers? Then you will need to
> check that area out and think about changePerm.sh maybe.
>
> The other one is just at a Service Request stage and hasn't been
> created yet as a 9208 bug even though a prior 9206 bug that said it was
> fixed in 9206 has regressed.
>
> Did you say you were thinking about a production box with 9208? Did
> you complete testing 9208 in a test environment first?

Thanks a lot. Yes, I will be instaling in test environment first, I hate rolling back any installed patches, so want to know all known risks before installing. Received on Tue Sep 12 2006 - 09:18:07 CDT