On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 09:51:08AM -0700, Mike.Sullivan at sun.com wrote: > >The hardlink error there's nothing to do about I believe? > > Well if that's true you're also not putting this back :) > > It's upset because, as it says, you're linking to a file that's not > in the proto area. And since /usr/lib/isaexec is in ON not sfw, that's > not surprising. First I'd guess that should be a relative link anyway > or install isn't going to be happy. But then I'd wonder if it's really > legal to make a hard link to that binary in the first place? I don't > even see a man page for it on my desktop, so I'd wonder if it's really > consolidation-private to ON (but haven't looked in the ARC database). > If it's not, you'd have to copy it from somewhere into the proto area (ick). > But you might also see if a symlink works, or perhaps just write your > own given isaexec(3C) is documented and stable.
Which is what sma does. See usr/src/cmd/sma/snmpd.c. This seems really gross to me but it might be the least gross option. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" Fishworks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"
