In article <3f101fcc$0$29668$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk>,
"Rob Honeyman" <robhoneyman@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> I am trying to install signed patches on my Solaris 9 machine. I have
> installed patchpro and the secure keys successfully. I have also managed to
> run 'smpatch download' so all the patches I require are now in the
> /var/sadm/spool directory. However when I try to install the patches I am
> receiving '<myhost> is not a valid machine name', as far as I am aware all
> the networking is configured appropriately as I am able to communicate fine
> between other machines on my network, and host entries exist etc. Does
> anyone know what I am doing wrong?

Did you ever figure this out? I just tried smpatch and ran into the same
problem.

--
mailto:rlhamil@smart.net http://www.smart.net/~rlhamil

Lasik/PRK theme music:
"In the Hall of the Mountain King", from "Peer Gynt"

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:32:13 +0000, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
> In article <3f101fcc$0$29668$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk>,
> "Rob Honeyman" <robhoneyman@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> I am trying to install signed patches on my Solaris 9 machine. I have
>> installed patchpro and the secure keys successfully. I have also managed to
>> run 'smpatch download' so all the patches I require are now in the
>> /var/sadm/spool directory. However when I try to install the patches I am
>> receiving '<myhost> is not a valid machine name', as far as I am aware all
>> the networking is configured appropriately as I am able to communicate fine
>> between other machines on my network, and host entries exist etc. Does
>> anyone know what I am doing wrong?
>
> Did you ever figure this out? I just tried smpatch and ran into the same
> problem.

Ah, yes, I also had this problem. I am not sure I understand how/why this
occurs or what the problem fix is. When I read the man page for smpatch,
it looks like it should work (with defaults). Help? The problem seems to
be related to the use of a hostname (alias?) instead of a FQDN. ISTR the
error message has the FQDN in it? So why doesn't smpatch match that up
from NIS (which is what I am using, you too?)? Is there something (not
obvious?) that we forgot to do when setting up the smpatch tool?

My workaround is to explicitly specify hostname (without domain):

smpatch add -H <hostname> -- -i <patchname> ...

Then smpatch successfully adds the patch(es) to my system.

I have never tried to patch several systems simultaneously. Possible?

BTW, this is not a problem on Solaris 8, presumably because it does not
try to go through another layer of stuff (part of SMC?) with another login
(but I am already "root" on the same machine? why is that required?)?

--
Juhan Leemet
Logicognosis, Inc.

In article <10n2fntqffh79cd@corp.supernews.com>,
Richard L. Hamilton <Richard.L.Hamilton@mindwarp.smart.net> wrote:
>In article <3f101fcc$0$29668$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk>,
> "Rob Honeyman" <robhoneyman@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> I am trying to install signed patches on my Solaris 9 machine. I have

>Did you ever figure this out? I just tried smpatch and ran into the same
>problem.

I solved a similar problem by firing up smc and change the location
of the home toolbox under Console->Preferences

/regs
Fredrik


--
Fredrik Lundholm
dol @ ce.chalmers.se

The following worked for me:
smpatch add -H localhost -- -i <patchnumber>