[OpenAFS] Solaris 9 issues - making some progress

[Dale Ghent]

On Aug 13, 2004, at 11:14 AM, Douglas E. Engert wrote:
> Do you have a diff of the old and new header files?
> I have patch 112233-12 on my Solaris 9 workstation, but the AFS servers
> are running with 112233-11 The files are identical.

You know, this got me thinking, and did some digging around.

I just went through all of the Solaris 9 UFS and kernel patches, and 
discovered two patches, 113457 and 113073, which are the only patches 
which change /usr/include/sys/fs/ufs_fs.h.

113457 seems to have been withdrawn and superseded by 113073, which is 
a member of the Solaris 9 recommended patch cluster. This 113073 patch 
is a comprehensive UFS and LVM patch.

See, here our Solaris 9 boxes have S9 4/04 installed on them. The 
Solaris 9 box exhibiting the problems had the recommended cluster 
applied, which included 113073-13. We have another Solaris 9 box which 
is running AFS fine which has 113073-05 installed.

So it seems that somewhere after at least rev 05 of patch 113073 is 
when sun "broke" UFS as far as what AFS expects, and the kernel patches 
have no part in this.

Reading through the release history for the 113073 patch, nothing 
immediately sticks out as the cause of why 1) fs_interleave was removed 
from ufs_fs.h, and 2) why vfsck now has issues with block 0 of a UFS 
file system.

Can you check your S9 system for me and tell me what rev of 113073 you 
have installed, if it is installed?

/dale