| Author |
Message
|
| nadk |
 Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 11
|
thanks for ur replies but i still dont get it given the facts:
On hpux machine where the installation worked:
i did ls -l for /var and found for dir mqm:
permissions: rwxrwsr-x
owner:mqm
group:mqm
And when i did this for the failing machine i found out for /var/mqm:
permissions:rwxr-xr-x
owner:root
group:sys
----------------------------
Group mqm & sys include "root" and instlltn was done as root.
Both machines(hpux) had same permission set for /var!
what do you guys think? why this difference(owner and group for /var/mqm) on two machines while the process of installation is exactly same!
please reply |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| nadk wrote: |
thanks for ur replies but i still dont get it given the facts:
On hpux machine where the installation worked:
i did ls -l for /var and found for dir mqm:
permissions: rwxrwsr-x
owner:mqm
group:mqm
And when i did this for the failing machine i found out for /var/mqm:
permissions:rwxr-xr-x
owner:root
group:sys
----------------------------
Group mqm & sys include "root" and instlltn was done as root.
Both machines(hpux) had same permission set for /var!
what do you guys think? |
I think on the failing machine mqm has no write permission, causing this error!
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nadk |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 11
|
| i hv testcases doing the installation.. so something is to be done with this machine..ny suggestions about fixing it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| nadk wrote: |
| i hv testcases doing the installation.. so something is to be done with this machine..ny suggestions about fixing it? |
Correcting the permissions? Just a suggestion!
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Change the ownership of /var/mqm AND all its subdirectories and files to mqm:mqm
and change the permissions of all files underneath to rw-rw-r-- (directories will need x as well)
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nadk |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 11
|
| it occurred to me as well but that will be a one time solution ! my automation kicks off the installation runs every time a new WAS image comes ...so it will fail again and again whenever the mqm dir is created! so SOMETHING IS TO BE DONE WITH THE MACHINE but what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| nadk wrote: |
| it occurred to me as well but that will be a one time solution ! my automation kicks off the installation runs every time a new WAS image comes ...so it will fail again and again whenever the mqm dir is created! so SOMETHING IS TO BE DONE WITH THE MACHINE but what? |
Change your automated installation script.
/var/mqm should NEVER be owned by anything else but mqm:mqm...
and BTW what does a new WAS image have to do with /var/mqm ???  side effect?
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nadk |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 04 Feb 2008
Posts: 11
|
| sorry if its annoying u but that image installs WAS along ith MQ5.3, so when a new image comes, the previous WAS & MQ are uninstalled (deleting /var/mq) and again the process repeats(new WebSphere and MQ)....so the run fails every time on that hpux machine (even if i fix it for one installaiton manually) ...the same script is able to install successfully on another hpux machine...thanx anyway u guys. appreciate u taking ur time to solve my silly prob |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| nadk wrote: |
| sorry if its annoying u but that image installs WAS along ith MQ5.3, so when a new image comes, the previous WAS & MQ are uninstalled |
Why? 
As my associate comments, what's a new WAS got to do with WMQ?
Staying with the herd view, it sounds like there's a bug in your automated install script. As well as the "feature" that uninstalls WMQ every time.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Philip Morten |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Mar 2002
Posts: 230
Location: Hursley Park
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| nadk wrote: |
| sorry if its annoying u but that image installs WAS along ith MQ5.3, so when a new image comes, the previous WAS & MQ are uninstalled |
Why? :o
As my associate comments, what's a new WAS got to do with WMQ?
|
Webshere MQ 5.3 is included as the messaging component of this release of WAS
_________________
Philip Morten
The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Philip Morten wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| nadk wrote: |
| sorry if its annoying u but that image installs WAS along ith MQ5.3, so when a new image comes, the previous WAS & MQ are uninstalled |
Why?
As my associate comments, what's a new WAS got to do with WMQ?
|
Webshere MQ 5.3 is included as the messaging component of this release of WAS |
Again, I learn something from this board and my signature is vindicated 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
