My theory is that since this is a kernel patch, patchadd required this file. However, the other patches were not kernel patches, so this file was not required - hence, the reason they patched successfully. At least, that's my theory. After doing some digging, I did finally find the INST_RELEASE file (in /apps directory) and moved it to /var/sadm/softlink directory. I've restarted pca and it seems to be installing 139555 now. We'll see.
Jamen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Paul Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 7:58 AM To: PCA (Patch Check Advanced) Discussion Subject: Re: [pca] 139555-08 McGranahan, Jamen wrote: > patchadd is unable to find the INST_RELEASE file for the target > filesystem. This file must be present for patchadd to function > correctly. Interesting message, never seen that before. It's even mentioned in the man page for patchadd: Explanation and Recommended Action The INST_RELEASE file is missing from the system. This file is created during either initial installa- tion or during an update. So, the most interesting question: What does 'cat /var/sadm/system/admin/INST_RELEASE' show? > What I don't understand is that several other patches installed just > fine. If there was a file that wasn't present and prevented patchadd > from running for this patch, wouldn't affect the other patches as > well? But can you install other patches now, or do they all fail with the above message? Maybe the file got lost recently. Whenever I see /var involved, the first thing to ask is whether /var is a separate file system and whether it's still mounted and fine? Martin.
