Re: Security Alert #68 - Have to upgrade versions prior to 9.2.0. 4
- From: Paul Drake <bdbafh@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: thomas.mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:37:42 -0400
use opatch 1.0.0.0.51, not 1.0.0.0.50.
I find myself checking the notes on Metalink on a daily basis for this one.
if you're running on win32 - the files under the "docs" folders are invaluable.
Here is my favorite from the FAQ for OPatch:
"Q32. My Oracle Home on Windows doesn't have Perl, so I download and
install Perl from Active State. Now OPatch doesn't work...
Set the env. var. ACTIVE_STATE_PERL to TRUE (all upper-case)
(set ACTIVE_STATE_PERL=TRUE)
Run 'opatch lsinventory' to see if it works "
It sure works well for me that way.
The FAQs for this security alert can be found here
http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/showdoc?db=Not&id=282108.1
your original question is FAQ #2. It must be a popular one. :)
Paul
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:47:52 -0400, Mercadante, Thomas F
<thomas.mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> David,
>
> Here's the best part. Oracle now has *two ways* of sending patches out to
> us. One is the current (old) way where you run oracle installer. The other
> (new) way is where you run Opatch. And even within Opatch, they do things
> two different ways. Security Patch 68 has you run sqlplus and install new
> packages, and then run patch.csh - which runs sqlplus and installs stuff.
>
> How many monkees work at Oracle? Seems like the bad old days are
> reappearing - where the divisions are not talking to each other anymore, and
> they release stuff that is not ready for prime time. I *hate* being forced
> to apply patches (Security Patch 68) because they didn't test their own
> software well enough.
>
>
>
> Tom Mercadante
> Oracle Certified Professional
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Wagoner [mailto:dwagoner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 1:41 PM
> To: ORACLE-L (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Security Alert #68 - Have to upgrade versions prior to 9.2.0. 4
>
> Tom and Paul,
> Thanks for the feedback...looks like I will have to follow my original plan
> to upgrade to 9.2.0.5 and apply the security patches, as well as the patch
> for that index corruption bug. Now I just have to figure out if it's okay
> to apply those patches together :-). The fun never ends...
>
> Best regards,
>
> David B. Wagoner
> Database Administrator
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
