Very Computer

by **carlo.montan..** » Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:59:41

Hi list.
I've downloaded lsof 4.74 for Solaris 10 from sunfreeware and pkgadd'ed
to my Solaris 10 3/2005 installation.
It simply doesn't work: it seems to display only the files opened with
FD=txt, no stdin/out/err or other numeric fd; lsof -i gives always no
output.
Also, the process' command name is always "(unknown)".
Do you have lsof working on a 10?

TIA, Carlo

by **David Lawve** » Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:34:27

> Hi list.
> I've downloaded lsof 4.74 for Solaris 10 from sunfreeware and pkgadd'ed
> to my Solaris 10 3/2005 installation.
> It simply doesn't work: it seems to display only the files opened with
> FD=txt, no stdin/out/err or other numeric fd; lsof -i gives always no
> output.
> Also, the process' command name is always "(unknown)".
> Do you have lsof working on a 10?

From the lsof FAQ at ftp://lsof.itap.purdue.edu/pub/tools/unix/lsof/FAQ:
I don't recommend you use pre-compiled lsof binaries; I
recommend you obtain the sources and build your own binary.

--

Speaking for myself, not UW-Madison, not DoIT, not POST.

by **Victor A Abe** » Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:53:05

>> Hi list.
>> I've downloaded lsof 4.74 for Solaris 10 from sunfreeware and pkgadd'ed
>> to my Solaris 10 3/2005 installation.
>> It simply doesn't work: it seems to display only the files opened with
>> FD=txt, no stdin/out/err or other numeric fd; lsof -i gives always no
>> output.
>> Also, the process' command name is always "(unknown)".
>> Do you have lsof working on a 10?
> From the lsof FAQ at ftp://lsof.itap.purdue.edu/pub/tools/unix/lsof/FAQ:
>I don't recommend you use pre-compiled lsof binaries; I
>recommend you obtain the sources and build your own binary.

David is correct. Building lsof from its source distribution
at ftp://lsof.itap.purdue.edu/pub/tools/unix/lsof should
produce a working lsof for Solaris 10. I regularly test
tests of lsof on Solaris 10, most recently on its FCS "generic"
SPARC and ix86 versions, and lsof works properly there.

Notwithstanding other dangers, pre-built binaries have a
tendency to become dated when a UNIX dialect changes as fast
as Solaris 10 did during its early stages. Your poor results
suggest a change in some critical kernel structure occurred
between the time the lsof binary you downloaded and your
kernel were built.

Vic Abell, lsof author

by **cmon** » Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:20:32

Thank you, compiling from the source it works like a charm.

Very Computer

Troubles with lsof on Solaris 10

Troubles with lsof on Solaris 10

Troubles with lsof on Solaris 10

Troubles with lsof on Solaris 10

Troubles with lsof on Solaris 10