question regarding HP patch scheme

[Richard Hubbell]

Are there any plans to create an easier scheme for patching HP
systems? The current scheme is very time consuming.
So many parts of the process are tasks well suited for computers
yet the process requires human interaction. Why not just adopt
a scheme similar to SGI. It's far easier from all customer perspectives.
HP's scheme seems to be designed so that it is easier for HP.

[Anthony Goonetilleke]

have you tried the HP patch manager?
You simply run a script on your unix box upload it to HP and it will check and give you a list of patches that are needed and even create a depot file for you.

[Kevin McManus]

Thanks for the pointer to the SGI patch scheme. We'll take a look at it.

As for HP's HP-UX patching we provide a
variety of mechanisms for you to obtain
patches. Each mechanism is tuned for
different situations/use models. I'll see
if I can keep this brief:

Support+: CD-Rom distribution of standard
patch bundles for the HP-UX core operating
system. This solution is useful when you want to update your system to a specific patch level. Use it when you deploy new systems, update the OS (say from 10.x to 11) or at the beginning of a major test cycle. Patches included on the Support+ CD have survived extensive testing within HP and therefore represent the least risk of detrmimental side-effects.

ITRC/Individual Patches (a.k.a PatchDB) Use this interface to locate and obtain patches to fix specific problems. PatchDB will automatically compute co-requistites and present the patches that have the highest amount of testing (and therefore represent the least risk). PatchDB also allows you to obtain specific patches -- this is useful in order to satisfy the patch pre-requisites of an application vendor.

ITRC/Custom Patch Manager (CPM) - Use this interface to keep your system up-to-date patch-wise. CPM computes a list of patches applicable to your system and then you can cull that list into a custom bundle appropriate for your needs. Many customers have found CPM useful in keeping specific subsystems (eg. NFS, LVM, etc) up-to-date while keeping the rest of the system stable.

All HP-UX patches from HP are installed with the Software Distributor (SD) swinstall command.

Hope this helps.

Kevin McManus
HP

[Richard Hubbell]

Thanks for the pointer to the SGI patch scheme.
We'll take a look at it.

As for HP's HP-UX patching we provide a
variety of mechanisms for you to obtain
patches. Each mechanism is tuned for
different situations/use models. I'll see
if I can keep this brief:

Support+: CD-Rom distribution of standard
patch bundles for the HP-UX core operating
system. This solution is useful when you want to
update your system to a specific patch level.
Use it when you deploy new systems, update
the OS (say from 10.x to 11) or at the beginning
of a major test cycle. Patches included on the
Support+ CD have survived extensive testing
within HP and therefore represent the least risk
of detrmimental side-effects.

ITRC/Individual Patches (a.k.a PatchDB) Use
this interface to locate and obtain patches to fix
specific problems. PatchDB will automatically
compute co-requistites and present the patches
that have the highest amount of testing (and
therefore represent the least risk). PatchDB also
allows you to obtain specific patches -- this is
useful in order to satisfy the patch pre-requisites
of an application vendor.

ITRC/Custom Patch Manager (CPM) - Use this
interface to keep your system up-to-date
patch-wise. CPM computes a list of patches
applicable to your system and then you can cull
that list into a custom bundle appropriate for
your needs. Many customers have found CPM
useful in keeping specific subsystems (eg. NFS,
LVM, etc) up-to-date while keeping the rest of
the system stable.

All HP-UX patches from HP are installed with the
Software Distributor (SD) swinstall command.


You've not given me any new information.
I think you should look at making things easier for the customer.
customers = sys admins, developers, end users, db admins, IT admin,
strategic planners, and on and on.
HP needs to be more customer focused in this regard. Yes patches are complex
and the patch process is complicated. The customer doesn't care that it's
a difficult problem to solve. The customer would like it to be easier.
The steady stream of patches is better than none but the whole scheme
should be revised and re-thought so the customer doesn't have to
look here and there and read each patch description to determine
what's needed or what's safe or what's not safe.