SEO

I received the following e-mail from a client:

> last two nights I have had a WARNING on the server
>
> WARNING: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=0 id=6 lun=0 tag=00
> CPU2: WARNING: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=0 id=6 lun=0 tag=00
>
>
> repeated multiple times
>
> It looks like it's occurring between 1:15 A.M. and 3:30 A.M. when the backup is running.
>
> It completed backup last night, but didn't the previous night.

Searching google comes up with three foreign language hits,
one implicates oss478a, one LSI and SCO 5.0.x.

Searching SCO's knowledge base for A_RCheckCond turns up zip.
Searching Adaptec.com and LSI turns up zip.

The client is running a SuperMicro X5DL8-GG Dual Xeon
box with SCO 5.0.6 and two CPUs. The hard disk is a
RAID-5 on Adaptec 2010 ZCR controller and the backup tape
is an Ultrium tape used to replace a IOmega SCSI REV
drive when the REV drive failed (would not eject media).
Backup software is BackupEdge 2.2.

The Ultrium tape is on an LSI Logic 53C895A SCSI controller.

The system was installed on 3/17/2005 and has not produced
this error in the past.

Any ideas?


--
Steve Fabac
S.M. Fabac & Associates
816/765-1670

Steve M. Fabac, Jr. wrote:

> I received the following e-mail from a client:
>
> > last two nights I have had a WARNING on the server
> >
> > WARNING: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=0 id=6 lun=0 tag=00
> > CPU2: WARNING: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=0 id=6 lun=0 tag=00
> >
> >
> > repeated multiple times
> >
> > It looks like it's occurring between 1:15 A.M. and 3:30 A.M. when the backup is running.
> >
> > It completed backup last night, but didn't the previous night.
>
> Searching google comes up with three foreign language hits,
> one implicates oss478a, one LSI and SCO 5.0.x.
>
> Searching SCO's knowledge base for A_RCheckCond turns up zip.
> Searching Adaptec.com and LSI turns up zip.
>
> The client is running a SuperMicro X5DL8-GG Dual Xeon
> box with SCO 5.0.6 and two CPUs. The hard disk is a
> RAID-5 on Adaptec 2010 ZCR controller and the backup tape
> is an Ultrium tape used to replace a IOmega SCSI REV
> drive when the REV drive failed (would not eject media).
> Backup software is BackupEdge 2.2.
>
> The Ultrium tape is on an LSI Logic 53C895A SCSI controller.
>
> The system was installed on 3/17/2005 and has not produced
> this error in the past.
>
> Any ideas?

# cd /etc/conf/pack.d
# find * -name '*.[chaos]' | xargs strings -Fa | grep A_RSCheckCond
slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=%d id=%d lun=%d tag=%b
slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond_Used

"slha" is the driver for LSI Logic fka Symbios Logic nee NCR
Microelectronics 53c8xx SCSI HBAs.

I google'd the string and found 4 hits, none of which is a "foreign
language hit". They are all strings of gibberish extracted from the
middle of binary archives; all are archives which happen to contain one
version or another of the OSR5 "slha" driver.

So, something is going wrong with either the HBA or the tape drive. The
HBA is much easier to replace (no investment in tapes & data), I
recommend swapping in a cheap supported HBA which can talk to whatever
SCSI bus the drive has.

If you go to a different driver, there's a chance that even if it's a
drive problem, you will get better diagnostics out of the driver. The
string you're getting includes "CheckCond", short for "Check Condition",
a SCSI protocol message (see wikipedia.org/wiki/SCSI_check_condition).
One might hope that the driver would follow up by asking "What
condition?" and reporting that to you.

Swap in an HBA and be prepared to potentially need to swap in a
compatible drive.

If you have any sort of diagnostic software for the Ultrium drive, run
it. If you have cleaning tapes, clean it.

>Bela<

Bela Lubkin wrote:
> # cd /etc/conf/pack.d
> # find * -name '*.[chaos]' | xargs strings -Fa | grep A_RSCheckCond
> slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=%d id=%d lun=%d tag=%b
> slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond_Used
>
>>Bela<

Bela, why do you keep giving free technical support for the company that
showed you the door to reduce costs, so it could keep paying its lawyers
to sue its own customers and the Linux users?

Let it rot!

Pepe wrote:
> Bela Lubkin wrote:
>> # cd /etc/conf/pack.d
>> # find * -name '*.[chaos]' | xargs strings -Fa | grep A_RSCheckCond
>> slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=%d id=%d lun=%d tag=%b
>> slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond_Used
>>
>>> Bela<
>
> Bela, why do you keep giving free technical support for the company that
> showed you the door to reduce costs, so it could keep paying its lawyers
> to sue its own customers and the Linux users?
>
> Let it rot!

Some of us have work to do: even migrating systems to a more responsible
company's operating systems often benefits from having useful tools.

I'd also write it this way:

find /etc/conf/pack.d/ -name \*\.\[chaos\] | \
xargs strings -Fa \
grep A_RSCheckCond

But that's a matter of taste.

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008, Pepe wrote:
> Bela Lubkin wrote:
> > # cd /etc/conf/pack.d
> > # find * -name '*.[chaos]' | xargs strings -Fa | grep A_RSCheckCond
> > slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=%d id=%d lun=%d tag=%b
> > slha/Driver.o: A_RSCheckCond_Used
>
> Bela, why do you keep giving free technical support for the company that
> showed you the door to reduce costs, so it could keep paying its lawyers to
> sue its own customers and the Linux users?
>
> Let it rot!

There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic? If so please leave
and let us assist people that need assistance.

Thank you for your consideration of people needing assistance,


--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb@zenez.com>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>
> There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
> company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
> assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
> something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic?

Those who chose to go with SCO and paid for their OS, should get the
support they need from that company, which, you know, runs a business
for profit(TM).

The time to take responsability has come. So said company is a
dead-man-walking unable to provide support, all because of its own
faults and mismanagements? Too bad.

I'm not a fanatic. What made you wonder that?

I am asking, why provide free technical support for a company which
deserves nothing good?, for a company which sacked the one providing
said free technical support? I think it is a rational question, and not
a question of fanaticism.

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008, Pepe wrote:
> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> >
> > There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
> > company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
> > assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
> > something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic?
>
> Those who chose to go with SCO and paid for their OS, should get the support
> they need from that company, which, you know, runs a business for profit(TM).
>
> The time to take responsability has come. So said company is a
> dead-man-walking unable to provide support, all because of its own faults and
> mismanagements? Too bad.
>
> I'm not a fanatic. What made you wonder that?

You total disregard for anything other than your anti SCO sentiment.

> I am asking, why provide free technical support for a company which deserves
> nothing good?, for a company which sacked the one providing said free
> technical support? I think it is a rational question, and not a question of
> fanaticism.

We are not providing support for SCO we are providing it for people doing
real work. I guess all Linux support should only be provided by the
Distro's, right following your reasoning. No... There are those of us
that give back to others. Maybe it is just good carma.

So only Novell or Redhat should provide support! We are a community just
as much as any Linux community. We are also members of other communities.
We do it for reasons other than money. Bela is not doing it for SCO he is
doing it as part of a community.


--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb@zenez.com>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

pepe@naleco.com wrote:

> Bela, why do you keep giving free technical support for the company that
> showed you the door to reduce costs, so it could keep paying its lawyers
> to sue its own customers and the Linux users?

I didn't leave SCO for them to save money. It was a mutually agreed
departure because I had lost focus on the day to day minutiae of my job
and felt I would do better somewhere else.

I stil have lots of contacts in the SCO community and find it
interesting and fulfilling to give an occasional hand to people using
the products I was so involved in creating. There is pride in
workmanship. Now I suppose you will come back and deride the products.
Whatever dude.

>Bela<

Pepe wrote:
> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>>
>> There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
>> company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
>> assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
>> something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic?
>
> Those who chose to go with SCO and paid for their OS, should get the
> support they need from that company, which, you know, runs a business
> for profit(TM).

Yes, for the last 3 years it's been based on suing Linux developers. They lost
and are now bankrupt.

> The time to take responsability has come. So said company is a
> dead-man-walking unable to provide support, all because of its own
> faults and mismanagements? Too bad.

Hey, we're not helping *SCO* per se, we're helping each other.

> I'm not a fanatic. What made you wonder that?
>
> I am asking, why provide free technical support for a company which
> deserves nothing good?, for a company which sacked the one providing
> said free technical support? I think it is a rational question, and not
> a question of fanaticism.

Well, because if we're obviously doing better work, it supports the open
source models of open source and community support, it helps *our* business
models. It's certainly helping mine, and I'm tryihg to pay back to the SCO
user community the assistance they've given me.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pepe" <pepe@naleco.com>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sco.misc
To: <distro@jpr.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: Need help identifying error: A_RSCheckCond interrupt on ha=0


> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>>
>> There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
>> company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
>> assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
>> something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic?
>
> Those who chose to go with SCO and paid for their OS, should get the
> support they need from that company, which, you know, runs a business for
> profit(TM).
>
> The time to take responsability has come. So said company is a
> dead-man-walking unable to provide support, all because of its own faults
> and mismanagements? Too bad.
>
> I'm not a fanatic. What made you wonder that?
>
> I am asking, why provide free technical support for a company which
> deserves nothing good?, for a company which sacked the one providing said
> free technical support? I think it is a rational question, and not a
> question of fanaticism.

Everyone, however irrational, thinks they are rational, and from some
special perspective, they are.

You don't sound like a fanatic to me really. Just ignorant and
inconsiderate.

Ignorant of the fact that for15 or more years SCO was a really great product
and a really great company and there is nothing anyone who used that system
all during that time should feel ashamed about.
Ignorant of the fact that one of the ways the OS was great, was that it just
ran and ran for years, which means many currently running boxes were
installed before sco even broke up and sold the unix assets to Caldera.
Ignorant or inconsiderate of the fact that in that amount of time many
people build up lots of clients running that OS, many of which are still
running boxes installed since long before SCO became bad guys.
Ignorant or inconsiderate of the fact that even today that crappy nasty old
SCO os is still a better choice for lots of situations than anything else
available today.
Ignorant of the fact that some day when you are in a jam and need help,
someone else may say "let him rot, that stupid rehdat user...". Heck I'd say
that today in your case, now that you've advertised how much you appreciate
and value altruism.

Sure, I don't install any new SCO boxes either, but I'm not ignorant of the
fact that the universe is bigger than my experience.

--
Brian K. White brian@aljex.com http://www.myspace.com/KEYofR
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!