It looks like the general consensus is "go for it." Most responses said
they had practically no problems. Some reminded me of the normal upgrade
concerns. There were quite a few who mentioned problems with the CDROM.
Apparently the upgrade can't be down with a local CD so I won't even try.
Alot of people mentioned that this should improve the performance of the
machine, BONUS! I'm including a copy of the more significant responses.
Thanks to all who responded!!!!!
Geert Jan de Groot <geertj@ica.philips.nl>
barnes@sde.mdso.vf.ge.com (Barnes William)
cook@lams.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com (M. L. Cook)
swanes@etswwmd.nyeq.gs.com (Steve Swaney)
Mr T Crummey (DIJ) <tom@sees.bangor.ac.uk>
townsley@rocky.er.usgs.gov (Bill Townsley)
leclerc@austin.nam.slb.com
penrod@whiplash.er.usgs.gov (Dan Penrod)
sitongia@ozzel.hao.ucar.edu (Leonard Sitongia)
mharris@fsg.com (Michael Harris)
adamfox@super.org (Adam Fox)
Pat Cain (Denver) <pjc@denver.ssds.COM>
babb@k2.sanders.lockheed.com (Scott Babb)
Vladimir Lirner <vlirner@photon.poly.edu>
Jason.Hargis@PII.COM (Jason Hargis)
kevin@uniq.com.au (Kevin Sheehan {Consulting Poster Child})
jamest@sybase.com (James Terry)
Mike Raffety <miker@il.us.swissbank.com>
Mark Ferraretto <mferrare@physics.adelaide.edu.au>
clifft@titan.wordperfect.com (Cliff Trap (MIS))
-Jack
jack@medstat.med.utah.edu
==========================================================================
> From: Geert Jan de Groot <geertj@ica.philips.nl>
>
> Please put this in your summary:
> Don't upgrade 4100, 4200, 4300 or 4400 CPU'd to sunos 5.x.
> SUN does not support these machines correctly with solaris 2.x.
> I have done several tests and found:
> - There is a whole list of hardware that is not supported under sunos 5.x.
> These are things like 2nd ethernet interfaces, tapedrives, and such.
> A number of these items are _not_ mentioned in the release manual,
> so you will only find out when it's too late.
> - The performance of these machines with solaris 2.x is extremely poor.
> I don't know why, but you'll loose much.
> - The Intel Ethernet interface of these machines performs extremely
> poor. You don't want to make this machine a file server.
> Bottom line: you are best advised to leave these machines on sunos 4.1.3.
>
> Back to your question: We run 4.1.3 on our 4/280's and it is a major
> win compared to 4.1. I found no important problems.
=========================================================================
> From: townsley@rocky.er.usgs.gov (Bill Townsley)
>
> We just did an upgrade on a Sun 4/280 last weekend. The upgrade went
> smoothly with the following exception:
>
> When you run the pre-upgrade programs (check_perm and sunupgrade -d) a
> file is made which contains a list of all the files that will be
> changed/modified during the upgrade called volatile_file_list or
> something to that effect. READ THIS FILE!! You can use it as an
> argument to sunupgrade so that the files named therein will be renamed
> filename.41x signifying that they were used in the old OS and have been
> replaced by a new file. (ie, your original /etc/rc.local will be
> renamed /etc/rc.local.412 and a new /etc/rc.local will be installed).
>
> The use of the volatile_file_list is poorly documented in the Sun
> Installation and Release Manuals so we didn't know how to take
> advantage of this feature and WE ARE PAYING FOR IT. For instance, the
> only way to get our old /etc/rc.local, inetd.conf, etc is off of backup
> tape, but the dev drivers were overwritten in the upgrade and we can't
> get the Exabyte drives working to get the files off tape. As you can
> imagine this is causing problems major. Another example is that the
> upgrade installed a shiny new /etc/uucp/Systems file in place of my old
> one so that all the old systems I used to be connected to are unknown
> and I have to wait to until I can get the old file off tape before I
> can make those connections again.
>
> Other than that I found the Solaris 1.1 (4.1.3) installation to be very
> friendly and easy. They installation manual says to clear up to 2 megs
> in the root partition and up to 11 megs in /usr. You don't get this
> space back after the upgrade so be forewarned.
>
> Oh Ya...one more thing. BE SURE YOU BACK UP FIRST!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:08:06 CDT