Hi,

We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.

If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
was necessary?

Thanks in advance,
Jim

ohaya wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
> and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
> found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
> umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
> Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.
>
> If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
> was necessary?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Jim

Should not have been necessary, I've never had to do it (at least under
Solaris 8).

Since CD-ROMs from Oracle are read-only, I assume you mean, chmod the
mount point (directory) for the CD-ROM.

Presumably you followed the instructions to be in some other directory
outside of the CD-ROM mount point, to allow for the second and third
disks to be inserted during the install process.

-Mark Bole

Mark Bole wrote:
>
> ohaya wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
> > and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
> > found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
> > umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
> > Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.
> >
> > If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
> > was necessary?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Jim
>
> Should not have been necessary, I've never had to do it (at least under
> Solaris 8).
>
> Since CD-ROMs from Oracle are read-only, I assume you mean, chmod the
> mount point (directory) for the CD-ROM.
>
> Presumably you followed the instructions to be in some other directory
> outside of the CD-ROM mount point, to allow for the second and third
> disks to be inserted during the install process.
>
> -Mark Bole


Mark,

Yes, we executed the "runInstaller" while in a directory on the hard
drive. Something like:

/cdrom/./runInstaller

Honestly, I've asked a few people at work, and no one can explain this,
but every one of them seemed to know that we had to do the umount,
"chmod 777", then mount and then runInstaller.

Like you, I assumed that the /cdrom was just read-only, so I'm still
puzzled.

Jim

ohaya wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
> and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
> found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
> umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
> Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.
>
> If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
> was necessary?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Jim

I assume cdrom is the mount point. What were the perms & ownership for
cdrom before the chmod?

/Hans

HansF wrote:
>
> ohaya wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
> > and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
> > found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
> > umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
> > Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.
> >
> > If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
> > was necessary?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Jim
>
> I assume cdrom is the mount point. What were the perms & ownership for
> cdrom before the chmod?
>
> /Hans


Hi,

I *knew* that someone was going to ask that. I didn't check at the
time, but I'll try tomorrow. Sorry.

Jim

ohaya <ohaya@cox.net> wrote in message news:<41A3FFB7.D4928690@cox.net>...
> HansF wrote:
> >
> > ohaya wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We'd been trying to install Oracle 9i on a Solaris 9 machine from CD,
> > > and were finally able to get it working. However, one thing that we
> > > found (that wasn't in the info that we had) was that, as root, we had to
> > > umount the cdrom drive, "chmod 777" the cdrom, then mount it again.
> > > Once we did that we were able to execute runInstaller ok.
> > >
> > > If anyone knows, I'm kind of curious about exactly WHY the "chmod 777"
> > > was necessary?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > Jim
> >
> > I assume cdrom is the mount point. What were the perms & ownership for
> > cdrom before the chmod?
> >
> > /Hans
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I *knew* that someone was going to ask that. I didn't check at the
> time, but I'll try tomorrow. Sorry.

Just curious if chmod 666 works. [he asks with a devilish grin]

The numbers are user, group, world. Each bit means something. So you
add the bits up, read=4, write=2, and execute=1. If you have execute
access to a directory, but not read access, you can see directory
information about the files in that directory, but you can't read the
files. Execute access can be thought of as search access on a
directory. If you have a directory with execute and not read, you can
execute the file if you know its name, but you can't find out any
files names if you don't know them.

Protection can apply down through the directory tree from the mount.
So it could be possible that Oracle needs proper access to something
under the mount directory in order to run, for example, querying
something to find out what script to run for the platform. It's been
too long since I've played with the installs to remember if this is
actually what is going on.

There are also subtle things that can happen using umask 022, as well
as some group protections - and I think Solaris allows different group
ID mechanisms to be used when mounting. Consider also that unix finds
the first matching group in /etc/group, to be completely confused.

Or "see your system administrator."

Oh yeah, is it a UFS file system? The mount will always use the
protection of the root directory of the filesystem, not the mount
point. Perhaps other filesystems do the same.

ll -a /

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Yo Sigman! Is that a fire in your belly or do you just have an ulcer
from guilt? http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...4cingular.html