Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

[V440] Firmware update, OS choice and ALOM password

 
 
Bubba
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2011, 08:56 AM
Greetings,

I got V440 and have several questions:

- as far as I saw, the easiest and most flexible OS would still be
Solaris, since both OpenBSD and Debian lacked some functionality. Both
Debian and OBSD had problems with partitioning and boot options, while
Debian couldn't recognize two additional Quad Gigabit cards and required
drivers that were not available. Thus, I figured it would be safest to try
with Solaris - as machine has 2x 1.2 GHz Sparcs and 4GB RAM, would latest
Solaris 10 work fine (I don't require GUI; compiler sets and web/DB
related applications will suffice, and I am aware they are available and
work properly (but not necessarily to fast) on Slowaris.

- the machine was taken from a financial institution and lacked any DASD,
but I also didn't get any administration documentation. IOW - when I bump
into ALOM's login part, I have no clue how to log in. Apparently, while
searching through the Net, "admin" should be username and last 8 *digits*
of V440's serial number would make a password. Although I assume someone
tampered with those credentials, my serial number is alphanumeric, so this
"digit" part largely makes me doubt in that information. Nevertheless, I
also read it is possible to reset ALOM credentials via Solaris. Since I
can boot (>ok prompt appears and allows booting from cdrom and disks), is
this doable?

- lastly, my ROM version is OpenBoot 4.22.33 and there seems to be an
upgrade. It also seems Oracle has put much effort to make my life
miserable and provided numerous steps in order to obtain one with
requirements I don't understand how to comply to. They require "The
Customer Support Identifier (or CSI) is the identifier used for the
support contract for between you and Oracle Support. You may request
access to one or more, typically you enter a CSI of about 8 digits in
length." and filling out contact forms... All in all, I wonder, since I
cannot find change log and would like to upgrade machine with two
additional CPU's with 8GB RAM, is it worth additional trouble
and exploration? What is the procedure of upgrading OpenBoot anyway? Can
it be obtained via 3rd party, in terms of being able to download it
somewhere else?

TIA!


--
"If you lie to the compiler,
it will get its revenge."
Henry Spencer
2.718281828459045235360287471352662497757247093699 959574966967627.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Doug McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2011, 05:49 PM
Bubba <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>I got V440 and have several questions:


>- as far as I saw, the easiest and most flexible OS would still be
>Solaris, since both OpenBSD and Debian lacked some functionality...


Definately. Those other two choices stopped development altogether for
some point in time. I don't know know if they are currently active or not.
But yes, Solaris is definately the only thing that would work well on
that hardware.

>work properly (but not necessarily to fast) on Slowaris.


Slowaris is what Linux kids claimed until they had to implement all
the normal locking and control of a modern kernel (instead of flying
loose and carefree). I find Solaris to be much faster on *equivilent*
hardware than Linux systems..

>into ALOM's login part, I have no clue how to log in. Apparently, while
>searching through the Net, "admin" should be username and last 8 *digits*
>of V440's serial number would make a password.


Hmm, I don't remember that being correct. But either way, just reset
it once you have Solaris running. I wouldn't put too much work into
getting into ALOM now if you can boot cdrom. And then you just reset
it later to use it.

>.. read it is possible to reset ALOM credentials via Solaris. Since I
>can boot (>ok prompt appears and allows booting from cdrom and disks), is
>this doable?


Sure sounds like it. Once I had a few used systems that couldn't boot
dvd/cdrom and then I had to move a preinstalled system harddisk over
from another of the same class and get in that way..


>- lastly, my ROM version is OpenBoot 4.22.33 and there seems to be an
>upgrade. It also seems Oracle has put much effort to make my life
>miserable and provided numerous steps in order to obtain one with
>requirements I don't understand how to comply to.


Its fairly simple. Get the system up on maintenance for something
starting around $1200/yr per socket.

Since I'm guessing that it isn't worth that for you, stay with the
OpenBoot you have. OpenBoot upgrades are boring, the fixes are
normally pretty esoteric. The only "feature" I've seen in fairly
recent Openboot is WANBoot, but I don't know if yours is new enough or
not. Its not like you spend more than 0.00001% of the time ever messing
in OpenBoot. Its about as exciting as updating your boot blocks.

The procedure to do it normally is just installing a patch in Solaris.
Somebody may or may not have the specific patch you need online, but I
wouldn't bother searching for it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bubba
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2011, 09:26 PM
Doug McIntyre's log on stardate 06 stu 2011

>>- as far as I saw, the easiest and most flexible OS would still be
>>Solaris, since both OpenBSD and Debian lacked some functionality...

> Definately. Those other two choices stopped development altogether
> for some point in time. I don't know know if they are currently
> active or not. But yes, Solaris is definately the only thing that
> would work well on that hardware.


I notticed that, on kinda harder way.

>>work properly (but not necessarily to fast) on Slowaris.

> Slowaris is what Linux kids claimed until they had to implement all
> the normal locking and control of a modern kernel (instead of flying
> loose and carefree). I find Solaris to be much faster on *equivilent*
> hardware than Linux systems..


Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
simmilar things?

>>into ALOM's login part, I have no clue how to log in. Apparently,
>>while searching through the Net, "admin" should be username and last
>>8 *digits* of V440's serial number would make a password.

> Hmm, I don't remember that being correct. But either way, just reset
> it once you have Solaris running. I wouldn't put too much work into
> getting into ALOM now if you can boot cdrom. And then you just reset
> it later to use it.


I was afraid there might be something important in ALOM that would
prevent me from accessing OS or something like that.

As it appears, I should be good to go to fully functional Solaris.

One more thing - there are two drives that came with machine, loaded
with Solaris. Now when I star the installation procedure, I am offered
an upgrade or "initialization" (I might be wrong, but something like
that). Since I only skimmed through the instalation procedure and
haven't reall started it yet, is it possible to wipe/zero-fill/LLF SCSI
drives from the console, just to avoid any potential fuss with the
instalation?

> Sure sounds like it. Once I had a few used systems that couldn't boot
> dvd/cdrom and then I had to move a preinstalled system harddisk over
> from another of the same class and get in that way..


Since machine came from financial institution, I was affraid it might
have some thorougher security roles. Lucky me, however, I was wrong...


>>- lastly, my ROM version is OpenBoot 4.22.33 and there seems to be an
>>upgrade. It also seems Oracle has put much effort to make my life
>>miserable and provided numerous steps in order to obtain one with
>>requirements I don't understand how to comply to.

> Its fairly simple. Get the system up on maintenance for something
> starting around $1200/yr per socket.


Hehe...

> Since I'm guessing that it isn't worth that for you, stay with the
> OpenBoot you have. OpenBoot upgrades are boring, the fixes are
> normally pretty esoteric. The only "feature" I've seen in fairly
> recent Openboot is WANBoot, but I don't know if yours is new enough
> or not. Its not like you spend more than 0.00001% of the time ever
> messing in OpenBoot. Its about as exciting as updating your boot
> blocks.


My wories were regarding potential incompatibility with additional
hardware (more RAM, new CPU cards, etc.); so, it's not worth it?

> The procedure to do it normally is just installing a patch in
> Solaris. Somebody may or may not have the specific patch you need
> online, but I wouldn't bother searching for it.


It's not like I haven't tried, but I'll just skip it now.

Thank you for your feedback.

BTW, JFTR, I measured power consumption of V440:

(ATTN: may wrap)
http://2.718281828459045235360287471...nsumption.html

--
"If you lie to the compiler,
it will get its revenge."
Henry Spencer
2.718281828459045235360287471352662497757247093699 959574966967627.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
DoN. Nichols
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 03:18 AM
On 2011-11-06, Bubba <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Doug McIntyre's log on stardate 06 stu 2011


[ ... ]

>>>work properly (but not necessarily to fast) on Slowaris.

>> Slowaris is what Linux kids claimed until they had to implement all
>> the normal locking and control of a modern kernel (instead of flying
>> loose and carefree). I find Solaris to be much faster on *equivilent*
>> hardware than Linux systems..

>
> Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
> simmilar things?


Well ... I tend to prefer the compiler in Sun's "Studio 12"
development package -- if you can still get it along with Solaris 10
since the Oracle takeover, but there are some programs which really need
gcc to compile. My experience is that one takes longer to compile, but
produces somewhat faster code. (And I forget which is which at the
moment.)

[ ... ]

> I was afraid there might be something important in ALOM that would
> prevent me from accessing OS or something like that.


Only if you are trying to control it remotely (via ALOM). If
the V440 is like the Sun Fire 280R, you can even pull out the card which
implements ALOM or RSC (mine had RSC, not ALOM). However, the Sun Fire
V120 has the LOM chip on the system board, so you can't do that, though
you can change a jumper and power it up to flush the current settings
(including passwords) in the LOM.

Now, if someone had set the firmware password in the OBP, and
set the security-mode to "command" or "full", you could not boot from
the CD-ROM at all, and could only boot from a disk with Solaris
installed. From there, you could reset the security-mode to "none" and
clear the security-password, and then be free to do what you needed.

> As it appears, I should be good to go to fully functional Solaris.
>
> One more thing - there are two drives that came with machine, loaded
> with Solaris. Now when I star the installation procedure, I am offered
> an upgrade or "initialization" (I might be wrong, but something like
> that). Since I only skimmed through the instalation procedure and
> haven't reall started it yet, is it possible to wipe/zero-fill/LLF SCSI
> drives from the console, just to avoid any potential fuss with the
> instalation?


If you select "initial install" (I think that is the term, not
"initialize"), you will newfs all the disk partitions, and if you
re-partition (select the "custom" option when it gets to asking about
disk partitions), that will pretty much force a newfs on each changed
partition. But really, an "initial install" will clear away anything on
the disk anyway -- though not as thoroughly as it would with the format
"analyze" options set for one of the modes to "destroy existing data" --
but I hope that you have plenty of time to twiddle your thumbs while it
does this.

If you can boot to Solaris and log in as root, then they proably
did their own wipe of the disks and did a fresh install of Solaris
anyway -- whatever version they had on hand. :-)

>> Sure sounds like it. Once I had a few used systems that couldn't boot
>> dvd/cdrom and then I had to move a preinstalled system harddisk over
>> from another of the same class and get in that way..

>
> Since machine came from financial institution, I was affraid it might
> have some thorougher security roles. Lucky me, however, I was wrong...
>


Freshly scrubbed disks with a new install of Solaris -- I would
*hope*. :-) Maybe spare disks which they kept around fully loaded with
the OS for emergencies, and which they swapped in to send away a "clean"
system.

[ ... ]

>> Since I'm guessing that it isn't worth that for you, stay with the
>> OpenBoot you have. OpenBoot upgrades are boring, the fixes are
>> normally pretty esoteric. The only "feature" I've seen in fairly
>> recent Openboot is WANBoot, but I don't know if yours is new enough
>> or not. Its not like you spend more than 0.00001% of the time ever
>> messing in OpenBoot. Its about as exciting as updating your boot
>> blocks.

>
> My wories were regarding potential incompatibility with additional
> hardware (more RAM, new CPU cards, etc.); so, it's not worth it?


Usually the upgrades fix minor things with the hardware, and if
the system has been running quite a while with no problems (in their
service, not yours) it is probably new enough. I do like to upgrade if
I can, but Oracle has made it too difficult to get the firmware patches
these days.

[ ... ]

> BTW, JFTR, I measured power consumption of V440:
>
> (ATTN: may wrap)
> http://2.718281828459045235360287471...nsumption.html


O.K. Looks like UK power cords. Nice Fluke meters.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <(E-Mail Removed)> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
 
Reply With Quote
 
George
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 03:08 PM
On 11/06/2011 10:18 PM, DoN. Nichols wrote:
> On 2011-11-06, Bubba<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Doug McIntyre's log on stardate 06 stu 2011

>
> [ ... ]
>
>>>> work properly (but not necessarily to fast) on Slowaris.
>>> Slowaris is what Linux kids claimed until they had to implement all
>>> the normal locking and control of a modern kernel (instead of flying
>>> loose and carefree). I find Solaris to be much faster on *equivilent*
>>> hardware than Linux systems..

>>
>> Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
>> simmilar things?

>
> Well ... I tend to prefer the compiler in Sun's "Studio 12"
> development package -- if you can still get it along with Solaris 10
> since the Oracle takeover, but there are some programs which really need
> gcc to compile. My experience is that one takes longer to compile, but
> produces somewhat faster code. (And I forget which is which at the
> moment.)


Yes, much code is chock full of Gnuisms that will only compile with gcc.

Many moons ago, a delegation of Sun engineers gave a dog-and-pony show
at my place of employment. They said that after developing dtrace, they
looked at "Slowlaris", found the problems to be system system libraries,
and worked hard at eliminating the latency. (This is Solaris 10, of
course.)

G
 
Reply With Quote
 
Casper H.S. Dik
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 03:16 PM
George <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>Yes, much code is chock full of Gnuisms that will only compile with gcc.


The current crop of Stdio compilers accepts most of the GNUisms.

Casper
--
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bubba
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 09:28 PM
DoN. Nichols's log on stardate 07 stu 2011

>> Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
>> simmilar things?

> Well ... I tend to prefer the compiler in Sun's "Studio 12"
> development package -- if you can still get it along with Solaris 10
> since the Oracle takeover, but there are some programs which really
> need gcc to compile. My experience is that one takes longer to
> compile, but produces somewhat faster code. (And I forget which is
> which at the moment.)


Hehe, well, I'd sacrifice longer compile time (that is, after all, "one
time job") for faster run time.

Either way, I need CLI tool, so I believe "Studio 12" or whatever is IDE,
so it is probably not worth installing just for compiler.

In any case, I'll check it out, thanks.

>> I was afraid there might be something important in ALOM that would
>> prevent me from accessing OS or something like that.

> Only if you are trying to control it remotely (via ALOM). If
> the V440 is like the Sun Fire 280R, you can even pull out the card
> which implements ALOM or RSC (mine had RSC, not ALOM). However, the
> Sun Fire V120 has the LOM chip on the system board, so you can't do
> that, though you can change a jumper and power it up to flush the
> current settings (including passwords) in the LOM.


I saw some jumpers, yes, and I thought they might be for something like
clearing settings. However, I couldn't find any sane documentation
regarding that card per se, so I'll have to give it a try a bit more...

> If you select "initial install" (I think that is the term, not
> "initialize"), you will newfs all the disk partitions, and if you
> re-partition (select the "custom" option when it gets to asking about
> disk partitions), that will pretty much force a newfs on each changed
> partition. But really, an "initial install" will clear away anything
> on the disk anyway -- though not as thoroughly as it would with the
> format "analyze" options set for one of the modes to "destroy
> existing data" -- but I hope that you have plenty of time to twiddle
> your thumbs while it does this.


Oh, that's great news.

Well, I'll just keep it rollin' during the night...

> Freshly scrubbed disks with a new install of Solaris -- I would
> *hope*. :-) Maybe spare disks which they kept around fully loaded
> with the OS for emergencies, and which they swapped in to send away a
> "clean" system.


I don't really care, I just want to wipe them clean, even if they had
human readable text files with PIN's.

> O.K. Looks like UK power cords. Nice Fluke meters.


Nope, two times. It's Croatia (Schuko -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuko) and ammeter's noware near Fluke ;
but for el cheapo Ebay purchase, it does its job pretty well.

--
"If you lie to the compiler,
it will get its revenge."
Henry Spencer
2.718281828459045235360287471352662497757247093699 959574966967627.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 10:05 PM
Bubba <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> DoN. Nichols's log on stardate 07 stu 2011
>
>>> Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
>>> simmilar things?

>> Well ... I tend to prefer the compiler in Sun's "Studio 12"
>> development package -- if you can still get it along with Solaris 10
>> since the Oracle takeover, but there are some programs which really
>> need gcc to compile. My experience is that one takes longer to
>> compile, but produces somewhat faster code. (And I forget which is
>> which at the moment.)

>
> Hehe, well, I'd sacrifice longer compile time (that is, after all, "one
> time job") for faster run time.
>
> Either way, I need CLI tool, so I believe "Studio 12" or whatever is IDE,
> so it is probably not worth installing just for compiler.
>
> In any case, I'll check it out, thanks.


FWIW, I almost never use the IDE to compile, but it is well worth having
it if you need to debug.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Doug McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2011, 10:32 PM
Bubba <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>Doug McIntyre's log on stardate 06 stu 2011
>> ... I find Solaris to be much faster on *equivilent*
>> hardware than Linux systems..


>Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
>simmilar things?


Sure. But the comparisons are usually extremely lopsided. Ie. they
take a 12 year old Sun server, and run it up against a modern Intel
Xeon, and trump that the Xeon CPU is faster, disk is faster, etc.

>I was afraid there might be something important in ALOM that would
>prevent me from accessing OS or something like that.


Only if it doesn't let you boot without a password.

>As it appears, I should be good to go to fully functional Solaris.


>One more thing - there are two drives that came with machine, loaded
>with Solaris. Now when I star the installation procedure, I am offered
>an upgrade or "initialization" (I might be wrong, but something like
>that). Since I only skimmed through the instalation procedure and
>haven't reall started it yet, is it possible to wipe/zero-fill/LLF SCSI
>drives from the console, just to avoid any potential fuss with the
>instalation?


If you do an initial install, vs. a an upgrade, you'll have the option
to redo the drive layout, and it'll newfs all your new partitions
right over anything old.

>Since machine came from financial institution, I was affraid it might
>have some thorougher security roles. Lucky me, however, I was wrong...
>


In my experience, the bigger the institution, the more lax the
security/knowledge/sys admin experience.

>>>.OpenBootPROM Version <<<

>My wories were regarding potential incompatibility with additional
>hardware (more RAM, new CPU cards, etc.); so, it's not worth it?


It is a remote possibility that you could require a new OBP to support
the newest CPUs, I don't know. I search for the release notes for 142707-01,
but didn't really see anything that called out to me as required for
newer CPUs than you may have. If you buy CPU upgrades from a decent
dealer, they may just help you out if something is required.

>BTW, JFTR, I measured power consumption of V440:


Looks like about right from what I remember of those class of machines.
It got worse after these, then better after those.
 
Reply With Quote
 
DoN. Nichols
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-08-2011, 04:09 AM
On 2011-11-07, Bubba <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> DoN. Nichols's log on stardate 07 stu 2011
>
>>> Is that correct, for example, in respect of gcc, web performance and
>>> simmilar things?

>> Well ... I tend to prefer the compiler in Sun's "Studio 12"
>> development package -- if you can still get it along with Solaris 10
>> since the Oracle takeover, but there are some programs which really
>> need gcc to compile. My experience is that one takes longer to
>> compile, but produces somewhat faster code. (And I forget which is
>> which at the moment.)

>
> Hehe, well, I'd sacrifice longer compile time (that is, after all, "one
> time job") for faster run time.


With the tradeoff that if you are doing a lot of compiles in
debugging, the faster compile is a benefit until you are ready for
production. (So write your code so it will compile on both. :-)

Here is the comparison (using the old dhrystone benchmark) with
the two compilers on a Sun Blade 2000 with dual 1.2 GHz CPUs:

================================================== ====================
* MACHINE MICROPROCESSOR OPERATING COMPILER DHRYSTONES/SEC.
* TYPE SYSTEM NO REG REGS
* -------------------------- ------------ ----------- ---------------
* SB-2K US-III dual 1.2 GHZ Solaris 10 cc 3086419 3086419
* SB-2K US-III dual 1.2 GHZ Solaris 10 gcc 3355704 3355704
================================================== ====================

So -- since gcc produced the faster run time (in this one very
limited benchmark), then the cc with Studio 12 must have been the faster
compile time.

with lots of other machine results snipped out.

> Either way, I need CLI tool, so I believe "Studio 12" or whatever is IDE,
> so it is probably not worth installing just for compiler.


There are a bunch of CLI compilers in the Studio 12 package, and
NetBeans is the accompanying IDE, which I have never used.


================================================== ====================
/opt/SUNWspro/bin:
analyzer@ cxref@ fbe@ rtc_patch_area@ tcov@
b2m@ dbx@ fdumpmod@ rxm@ tha@
bcheck@ dem@ fpp@ rxs@ uil2xd@
bil2xd@ dmake@ fpr@ sbcleanup@ uninstaller@
binopt@ dumpstabs@ fpversion@ sbenter@ version-5.0@
c++filt@ dwarfdump@ fsplit@ sbquery@ version@
c89@ ellcc@ gil2xd@ sbtags@ visu@
c99@ er_archive@ gnuattach@ smallxd@ visuroot@
cb@ er_cp@ gnuclient@ smctl@ whatdir@
cc-5.0@ er_export@ gnudoit@ sparcv9/ xdcapture@
cc@ er_kernel@ gvim@ ss_attach@ xdconfig@
CC@ er_mv@ indent@ sunas@ xdesigner@
CCadmin@ er_print@ libsunperf_check@ sunc89@ xdhelp@
cflow@ er_rm@ lint@ sunc99@ xdrecord@
checkjava@ er_src@ lock_lint@ suncc@ xdreplay@
collect@ etags@ ootags@ sunCC@ xdroot@
cscope@ f77@ prepare_system@ sunf77@ xdtosj@
ctc@ f90@ ptclean@ sunf90@ xemacs-mule@
ctcr@ f95@ rcs-checkin@ sunf95@ xemacs@
ctrace@ fbe-4.0@ rdtimgr@ sunstudio@
================================================== ====================

These are all duplicated by more links in /usr/bin. So lots of CLI
compilers, including several flavors of C, and several versions of
FORTRAN as well as tools like indent, cflow, cscope, and dbx (the
debugger).

BTW Also beware that some programs may not absolutely require gcc
to compile, but will look like it, because they require a gnu
(or similar) version of make.

BTW Also notice several gnu programs are in the above list.

> In any case, I'll check it out, thanks.


Enjoy.

>>> I was afraid there might be something important in ALOM that would
>>> prevent me from accessing OS or something like that.

>> Only if you are trying to control it remotely (via ALOM). If
>> the V440 is like the Sun Fire 280R, you can even pull out the card
>> which implements ALOM or RSC (mine had RSC, not ALOM). However, the
>> Sun Fire V120 has the LOM chip on the system board, so you can't do
>> that, though you can change a jumper and power it up to flush the
>> current settings (including passwords) in the LOM.

>
> I saw some jumpers, yes, and I thought they might be for something like
> clearing settings. However, I couldn't find any sane documentation
> regarding that card per se, so I'll have to give it a try a bit more...


Is the ALOM on the V440 a separate card, like the RCS on the Sun
Fire 280R? If so, you can simply pull the card and get it all out of
the way until you have an installed OS, and then can reinstall the ALOM
card and clean the user list and associated passwords in there.

>> If you select "initial install" (I think that is the term, not
>> "initialize"), you will newfs all the disk partitions, and if you
>> re-partition (select the "custom" option when it gets to asking about
>> disk partitions), that will pretty much force a newfs on each changed
>> partition. But really, an "initial install" will clear away anything
>> on the disk anyway -- though not as thoroughly as it would with the
>> format "analyze" options set for one of the modes to "destroy
>> existing data" -- but I hope that you have plenty of time to twiddle
>> your thumbs while it does this.

>
> Oh, that's great news.
>
> Well, I'll just keep it rollin' during the night...


O.K. The initial install does not take that long, even with
manual repartitioning, but if you go into format and ask for a
destructive surface check, that will take forever with 72 GB or larger
disks. But for your purposes, just letting the initial install do its
newfs on each partition should be fine.

>> Freshly scrubbed disks with a new install of Solaris -- I would
>> *hope*. :-) Maybe spare disks which they kept around fully loaded
>> with the OS for emergencies, and which they swapped in to send away a
>> "clean" system.

>
> I don't really care, I just want to wipe them clean, even if they had
> human readable text files with PIN's.


If you really fear that such is there (and are worried about it
being there), then the format with the surface check option. O.K. Here
is the first menu in format:

================================================== ====================
FORMAT MENU:
disk - select a disk
type - select (define) a disk type
partition - select (define) a partition table
current - describe the current disk
format - format and analyze the disk
repair - repair a defective sector
label - write label to the disk
analyze - surface analysis
defect - defect list management
backup - search for backup labels
verify - read and display labels
save - save new disk/partition definitions
inquiry - show vendor, product and revision
volname - set 8-character volume name
!<cmd> - execute <cmd>, then return
quit
format>
================================================== ====================

And the choice which I was trying to remember is "analyze". And its
sub-menu is:

================================================== ====================
ANALYZE MENU:
read - read only test (doesn't harm SunOS)
refresh - read then write (doesn't harm data)
test - pattern testing (doesn't harm data)
write - write then read (corrupts data)
compare - write, read, compare (corrupts data)
purge - write, read, write (corrupts data)
verify - write entire disk, then verify (corrupts data)
print - display data buffer
setup - set analysis parameters
config - show analysis parameters
!<cmd> - execute <cmd> , then return
quit
analyze>
================================================== ====================

The "purge" choice would probably be the best one, and it will take (by
default) two passes, each with bit patterns which are the compliment of
the previous one. A third pass with yet another bit pattern would be
even better, if you have the time to spare. After this, nobody except
perhaps the intelligence agencies would be able to show what was on
there before. You can tune the bit patterns among othe things with the
"setup" menu entry.

>> O.K. Looks like UK power cords. Nice Fluke meters.

>
> Nope, two times. It's Croatia (Schuko -


O.K. Certainly not US ones -- including based on the voltage
shown.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuko) and ammeter's noware near Fluke ;
> but for el cheapo Ebay purchase, it does its job pretty well.


That is what matters. The voltmeter is a Fluke, though, is it
not? I've lost the URL so I can't go back and check.

Good Luck,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: <(E-Mail Removed)> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Resetting ALOM password Doug McIntyre Sun Hardware 1 09-14-2010 09:07 AM
How to break ALOM password on SunFire v210 Mario Sun Hardware 2 08-23-2008 07:21 PM
ALOM v1.3 issue vijay kumar Sun Hardware 0 06-04-2004 09:56 PM
ALOM 1.2 to 1.4 Upgrade: Intermittent failure on 240/440? John Casebolt Sun Hardware 2 04-17-2004 05:49 AM
messed up ALOM on v210 Sun Hardware 3 09-26-2003 01:18 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:30 PM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment