GreenLake Administration
- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- Re: Another PHKL_31500 problem ??
Operating System - HP-UX
1847213
Members
3441
Online
110263
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
03-08-2007 03:35 AM
03-08-2007 03:35 AM
Another PHKL_31500 problem ??
I have been trying to apply the latest QPK/patch bundle to our HP-UX 11.23 production server (ran an assessment against the latest Mar '07 release for recommended patches).
When I come to build the depot on the system the swverify fails :
ERROR: Corrupt PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34944.C-MIN-32ALIB,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_35485.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHCO_34944.C-MIN-32ALIB,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHNE_35485.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: 4 of 139 filesets had Errors.
* 123 of 139 filesets had no Errors or Warnings.
ERROR: The Analysis Phase had errors and warnings.
This was following an attempt to build a depot/install from a bundle originally downloaded in November (applied and tested successfully on our dev system) resulted in the same type of issues when building the depot on live :
ERROR: Corrupt PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_33732.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_34671.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34215.CORE-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34764.ADMN-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_33508.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_34689.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHSS_35435.CDE-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
The prerequisite "UserLicense.UNL-USER,fa=HP-UX_B.11.23_IA"
for fileset "PHKL_31500.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0" cannot be
successfully resolved.
I have since read bad things about PHKL_31500 and wondered if this might be the cause of the issue :
swlist -l fileset -a state|grep 31500 shows the patch (and all filesets) as 'configured'.
However swverify PHKL_31500 reveals :
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/hpbtlan" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.100BT-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/vlan" should have mode "555" but the actual
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.LAN-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net" should have mode "555" but the actual
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net-ipv6" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net.init" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/rtradvd" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.NET-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.100BT-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.LAN-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.NET-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: 3 of 92 filesets had Errors.
* 89 of 92 filesets had no Errors or Warnings.
ERROR: The Analysis Phase had errors.
Could this patch have been re-applied or corrupted in some way previously ? I also read a thread suggesting it was just an error in the patch check install script or something.
We have no known system/performance issues presently and the system is rebooted weekly, but I need to resolve this and get the thing patched up to date.
I have attached the output from a full swverify \* of the box for reference. Thanks.
When I come to build the depot on the system the swverify fails :
ERROR: Corrupt PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34944.C-MIN-32ALIB,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_35485.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHCO_34944.C-MIN-32ALIB,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHNE_35485.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: 4 of 139 filesets had Errors.
* 123 of 139 filesets had no Errors or Warnings.
ERROR: The Analysis Phase had errors and warnings.
This was following an attempt to build a depot/install from a bundle originally downloaded in November (applied and tested successfully on our dev system) resulted in the same type of issues when building the depot on live :
ERROR: Corrupt PHKL_31500.100BT-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_33732.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_34671.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_32149.UX2-CORE,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34215.CORE-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHCO_34764.ADMN-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_33508.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHNE_34689.INETSVCS2-RUN,r=1.0
ERROR: Corrupt PHSS_35435.CDE-ENG-A-MAN,r=1.0
The prerequisite "UserLicense.UNL-USER,fa=HP-UX_B.11.23_IA"
for fileset "PHKL_31500.CORE2-KRN,r=1.0" cannot be
successfully resolved.
I have since read bad things about PHKL_31500 and wondered if this might be the cause of the issue :
swlist -l fileset -a state|grep 31500 shows the patch (and all filesets) as 'configured'.
However swverify PHKL_31500 reveals :
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/hpbtlan" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.100BT-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/vlan" should have mode "555" but the actual
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.LAN-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net" should have mode "555" but the actual
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net-ipv6" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/net.init" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: File "/sbin/init.d/rtradvd" should have mode "555" but the
ERROR: Fileset "PHKL_31500.NET-RUN,l=/,r=1.0" had file errors.
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.100BT-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.LAN-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: Verify failed PHKL_31500.NET-RUN,l=/,r=1.0
ERROR: 3 of 92 filesets had Errors.
* 89 of 92 filesets had no Errors or Warnings.
ERROR: The Analysis Phase had errors.
Could this patch have been re-applied or corrupted in some way previously ? I also read a thread suggesting it was just an error in the patch check install script or something.
We have no known system/performance issues presently and the system is rebooted weekly, but I need to resolve this and get the thing patched up to date.
I have attached the output from a full swverify \* of the box for reference. Thanks.
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
03-08-2007 05:36 AM
03-08-2007 05:36 AM
Re: Another PHKL_31500 problem ??
Shalom,
Hopefully you can swremove PHKL_31500 and reinstall.
Your current system state is probably a result of doing a double install on this patch. Normally SD will reject this but the -x reinstall=true option will override.
Thats what has been done.
You need to swremove every corrupt patch on your system and reinstall after this is done. The process could get very painful and obtuse.
Yet another reason to read patch notes carefully.
SEP
Hopefully you can swremove PHKL_31500 and reinstall.
Your current system state is probably a result of doing a double install on this patch. Normally SD will reject this but the -x reinstall=true option will override.
Thats what has been done.
You need to swremove every corrupt patch on your system and reinstall after this is done. The process could get very painful and obtuse.
Yet another reason to read patch notes carefully.
SEP
Steven E Protter
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
03-08-2007 10:30 AM
03-08-2007 10:30 AM
Re: Another PHKL_31500 problem ??
PHKL_31500 is not normal and should not be considered as such. Any attempt to remove or reinstall PHKL_31500 is likely to result in a "bad day".
PHKL_31500 was the bulk of the September 2004 release that added PA-RISC support to 11.23. It is similar to the 11.00 patch PHKL_18543 in that newer patches modify it rather than superseding it.
The only problem being reported here is that the listed files had permissions modified. I would be surprised if a GR patch was responsible, but a site-specific patch or user could have easily made the change. Review the permissions looking for write access (security hole) and use a command like:
# swlist -l file | grep -e "sbin/inet.d/net"
to look for other packages writing that file. The checksums are not mismatched, but if you are worried we could use the output of the above command to determine what the true cksums should be.
PHKL_31500 was the bulk of the September 2004 release that added PA-RISC support to 11.23. It is similar to the 11.00 patch PHKL_18543 in that newer patches modify it rather than superseding it.
The only problem being reported here is that the listed files had permissions modified. I would be surprised if a GR patch was responsible, but a site-specific patch or user could have easily made the change. Review the permissions looking for write access (security hole) and use a command like:
# swlist -l file | grep -e "sbin/inet.d/net"
to look for other packages writing that file. The checksums are not mismatched, but if you are worried we could use the output of the above command to determine what the true cksums should be.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
Company
Events and news
Customer resources
© Copyright 2026 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP