[commodorejohn]

I'm having some trouble getting HP-UX up and running on a PA-RISC workstation I picked up at VCFW a couple years back. In brief, I'm using what I've found listed as the "HP-UX 10.20 (2000-03) S800 Install and Core OS" disc image. This boots into the install environment just fine, but runs into a couple snags with the swinstall process. First off, it seems to misidentify the workstation (a Visualize C200) as a 32-bit system, since its internal model ID matches "9000/7**" - but I can work around that by editing the configuration file. However, past that, the swinstall agent conks out during the analysis phase, whether I run it in interactive mode or just tell it to use the defaults. Looking through the resulting logs, it looks like the checkinstall script for pretty much every package is freaking out when they try to check for available disk space using du and df, which for some reason aren't present in the install environment.

The whole thing is very odd - I wonder if I'm doing something wrong, but it seems like what I have should be the correct install disc. Can anyone offer some advice on this? I'm about ready to pull my hair out here... :/

[commodorejohn]

Update: folks over on VCF pointed out that I was mistaken in my understanding of the classification (I was under the impression that it was a simple divide between the 32-bit and 64-bit systems.) However, using the S700 install CD (June 2000) does resolve the complaint re: no suitable packages being available, but the issue with the analysis stage freaking out due to the lack of du/df remains. I'm a little baffled at this - if the installer needs these, and they're not loaded in the default install environment, how did it ever work in the first place?

In point of fact, they are on the CD, in a couple different package sets. Unfortunately, they're stored in compressed form, but the version of uncompress present in the install environment doesn't seem to recognize them :/

[commodorejohn]

The Debugging A Gorram Enterprise-Level IT Vendor's Flagship Product diary, part the nth: had a bit of a sanity check while banging my head against the wall with du and df - the compressed copies are not stored in classic compress format after all, they're gzip format.

Realizing this, I discovered that, in fact, gunzip was present in the install environment. After popping these into place for the installer, I tried again...and it crapped itself again. This time, the logs showed that A. the packages' checkinstall scripts assumed that the target volumes would be mounted to /disc when in fact they were just mounted directly to / instead, and B. when I made /disc a symlink to / in order to address this, the version of df present on the CD couldn't cope with it.

I eventually just ended up digging through the scripts and discovering that they only need df for two things - repeating the name of the target volume back (apparently?) and reporting the number of free blocks thereon. Ultimate solution: replace df with a script that responds to only these two requests and simply tells the script what it wants to hear :/

It is now finally in the process of running the install - I'm genuinely curious whether this will result in a functional system...

[commodorejohn]

Conclusion: a qualified success! The installer kvetched a bit at points, but rendered unto me a bootable, essentially functional installation that gets all the way up to launching the X server before crapping out and dropping back to the framebuffer console. This I'm not sure about; it may actually be my fault, at least in part. This is the Xerrors log (repeated ad nauseam):

Code:

Tue Mar 24 18:49:15 2020
error (pid 1339): Hostname paparisc is invalid. Setting DISPLAY to ':0'
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/Dpms.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/HpCr.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/PolyPrim.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/Record.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/Slsdx.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/Sync.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/extensions/Xie.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/HpCfb.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/Pinn.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/Slsd.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/VrxObsolete.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0
Skipping library: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/Wd.1
Unsupported broker interface version reported, Version #: 1.1
Supported broker interface version is, Version #: 1.0

Fatal server error:
Unable to resolve DDX Broker bids!: /usr/lib/X11/Xserver/brokers/screens/.

The part where it's complaining because the versions of things it provides are newer than the versions of things it supports is...odd, and that one probably isn't on me, but the invalid hostname may very well be. I've never entirely understood what *nix systems expect the hostname to be, other than an identifier for the system - is it supposed to be DNS-resolvable? Can I just put an entry in the hosts file pointing it to the loopback address?

[lunatic]

HP-UX 10.20 will run just fine on a C200. The C200 has a PA-8200. This is a 64bit CPU, but a 32bit kernel will work just fine.
As far as I remember, the C200 came after the FCS release of 10.20 and 11.00. You will need a later update version that includes support for the C200. You should check your installation media to make sure you have the correct release. Back in the days of 10.20 there were separate releases for workstations (700) and servers (800) and they were functionally different as well. Unless you have a special interest in 10.20, I would recommend 11.11, provided you have at least 256MB RAM.
The C200 was a fine machine, build like a tank and very reliable.

[commodorejohn]

As far as I remember, the C200 came after the FCS release of 10.20 and 11.00. You will need a later update version that includes support for the C200. You should check your installation media to make sure you have the correct release. Back in the days of 10.20 there were separate releases for workstations (700) and servers (800) and they were functionally different as well.

Yeah, the folks on VCF set me straight on that. As I documented above, using a 700-series install CD (2000-06, the last one I could find) did resolve the issue with reporting no compatible versions of the packages, but the baffling issues with the installer making incorrect assumptions and missing bits of software in the install environment that its own scripts require remained. Hacking my way through that got me to the point of having a basically functional 10.20 install, except for the X errors listed above.

Unless you have a special interest in 10.20, I would recommend 11.11, provided you have at least 256MB RAM.

I did try that - I was able to get 11.11 installed without any trouble, but it took significantly longer to boot and CDE crapped out saying it couldn't start its internal communication service. I figured since A. 10.20 is supposed to be lighter-weight, and B. I could readily find a source for the unlocked applications (read: dev. tools,) I might as well just go with the older version...but it's turned out to be no less trouble :/

The C200 was a fine machine, build like a tank and very reliable.

Indeed. Loud as all get-out, though Think only my PDP-11 outdoes it...

[lunatic]

Yeah, the folks on VCF set me straight on that. As I documented above, using a 700-series install CD (2000-06, the last one I could find) did resolve the issue with reporting no compatible versions of the packages, but the baffling issues with the installer making incorrect assumptions and missing bits of software in the install environment that its own scripts require remained. Hacking my way through that got me to the point of having a basically functional 10.20 install, except for the X errors listed above.

I have installed HP-UX many, many times and have never seen an error like this. That's what makes me wonder if something else is wrong.
In any way, try to make sure that the local hostname is resolvable. Check local /etc/hosts, /etc/resolv.conf, and nsswitch.conf. I am not quite sure if some things might expect a FQDN, but configuring the box to consult /etc/hosts first is a good idea.

I did try that - I was able to get 11.11 installed without any trouble, but it took significantly longer to boot and CDE crapped out saying it couldn't start its internal communication service. I figured since A. 10.20 is supposed to be lighter-weight, and B. I could readily find a source for the unlocked applications (read: dev. tools,) I might as well just go with the older version...but it's turned out to be no less trouble :/

10.20 is fine. At some you may notice that it's a bit old now, but it works. For example 10.20 doesn't have POSIX threads. There once was a special 10.30 release that introduced POSIX threads, before 11.0 was available for the full range of systems. You could develop your software on your old workstation with 10.30 and run it on say the new badass V-class running 11.0. But they abandoned 10.30 soon after 11.0 was available on all machines.

Indeed. Loud as all get-out, though  Think only my PDP-11 outdoes it...

As far as HP9000s go, a C200 isn't all that bad. At least it shouldn't be if all the hardware is still working correctly. The C classes were the most popular desktops. There was a B class as well, but it apparently never enjoyed the same popularity. The smaller B class never got the PA-8000 and this CPU was just so much faster than the older PA-7XXX designs.

[commodorejohn]

Okay, interesting discovery. On a whim, I tried re-doing the install from the same CD - but this time, I chose to run swinstall in non-interactive mode, letting it worry about everything past the initial configuration options. This worked like a charm - not only in resolving the issues with the final installation, but with the whole crazy business about the installer scripts crapping out. I can't for the life of me figure out why that would be, but it ran through the analysis phase without issue, without me having to do anything hacky about du/df. Very strange that only interactive mode would be affected by that, but there you go.

I did still run into the issue with CDE complaining about being unable to contact itself, but changing nsswitch.conf to refer to the hosts file before going to DNS so that the hostname could be resolved to itself sorted that out. Only problem now is that the video driver appears to have defaulted to the HP LEGO standard as a fallback - and after looking it up, it looks like the Visualize FX10 (which is what I have in there, the card that it came with being crashy and showing the wrong colors) was only even announced about the same time this release of 10.20 (the last one I was able to find) came out. Did 10.20 ever support the FX5/10 series? I may end up having to go with 11 after all...

[lunatic]

Okay, interesting discovery. On a whim, I tried re-doing the install from the same CD - but this time, I chose to run swinstall in non-interactive mode, letting it worry about everything past the initial configuration options. This worked like a charm - not only in resolving the issues with the final installation, but with the whole crazy business about the installer scripts crapping out. I can't for the life of me figure out why that would be, but it ran through the analysis phase without issue, without me having to do anything hacky about du/df. Very strange that only interactive mode would be affected by that, but there you go.

Oh, right. With the later 10.20 releases you shouldn't micromanage the installation. The reason is that these releases install certain update packages that cannot be fully configured during the installation. I think there is even a time during the installation, where the installer explains that.

I did still run into the issue with CDE complaining about being unable to contact itself, but changing nsswitch.conf to refer to the hosts file before going to DNS so that the hostname could be resolved to itself sorted that out. Only problem now is that the video driver appears to have defaulted to the HP LEGO standard as a fallback - and after looking it up, it looks like the Visualize FX10 (which is what I have in there, the card that it came with being crashy and showing the wrong colors) was only even announced about the same time this release of 10.20 (the last one I was able to find) came out. Did 10.20 ever support the FX5/10 series? I may end up having to go with 11 after all...

Yes, you need a certain CD that adds support for the Visualize FX cards. The FX10 is certainly supported and works, but feels like overkill for a C200.
Let me check my CD archives tomorrow. I am pretty sure I have the CD somewhere...
I wanted to reinstall 10.20 on a J5000 for some time now. Maybe now is a good time to do this.

The reason behind all this trouble is that HP-UX 10.20 is originally from 1996. They supported 10.20 for a long time as a landing release for a range of older hardware. When Y2K came around, their official policy was to just give away 10.20 to everyone, because older release weren't fully Y2K safe. HP-UX 10.20 is like IRIX 5.3: It ended up running on a lot of hardware it was never designed to run on.

[commodorejohn]

Oh, right. With the later 10.20 releases you shouldn't micromanage the installation. The reason is that these releases install certain update packages that cannot be fully configured during the installation. I think there is even a time during the installation, where the installer explains that.

There was something along those lines, but it was more specifically about one or two add-on patches that should only be installed after the fact, and whether I left those out or not seemed to make no difference...huh.

Yes, you need a certain CD that adds support for the Visualize FX cards. The FX10 is certainly supported and works, but feels like overkill for a C200.
Let me check my CD archives tomorrow. I am pretty sure I have the CD somewhere...

Thanks, that'd be awesome While you're digging through, any chance you have the 10.30 upgrade? POSIX threads would be a nice thing to have as I imagine a few different libraries/programs I might want to try building would need it...