Originally posted by: pneun68

Hi all,
i am in the process of creating installation packages of an ISV Product (Business Objects) on AIX 5.2.
Clearly it was not my idea to include blanks with the filenames i have to package, but as a blank is not forbidden, the guys at BO used them.

I tried it with the mkinstallp Command from the bos.adt.insttools package, versions 5.2.0.75 and 5.3.50.

A test with a reduced set of files (/app/bo65/bo_user/af httpd.conf) gives me the following error:
...
processing BO.bo_user.rte 6.5.1.0 fileset
sum: 0653-690 Cannot open ./app/bo65/bo_user/af.
sum: 0653-690 Cannot open httpd.conf.
...

On investigation in the makebff.pl i see a line:
$sum=`/usr/bin/sum $_`;
Obviously the addition of ".."-quotes in the right spot would have helped, so i created a private copy of makebff.pl and was able to create a regular bff-file.

Next step: install the bff-package
this gave me:

...
installp: APPLYING software for:
BO.bo_user.rte 6.5.1.0

sysck: 3001-018 An error was encountered reading the input file.
sysck: 3001-019 The last valid stanza read was /app/bo65/bo_user/afxhttpd.conf.
sysck: 3001-017 Errors were detected validating the files
for package BO.bo_user.rte.

...

Bummer: installp is a RS6K-binary so no possibility for further investigation.

Can anyone give me a pointer to more information and/or help EXCEPT:
1. fumbling with the filenames during install
2. trying to talk to the ISV to change filenames
as these would miss the targets we tried to achieve with the packaging.

Thank you in advance

Andreas

Please avoid sending Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for details

Originally posted by: nagger

Well filenames with blanks might not be baned but they have been pretty dumb for 37 years of UNIX history!!

I guess BO is showing its Windows history!

Just a suggestion here.
Can you:
Rename the dumb files.
Build the installp package.
Then have a post install script to un-rename them or add hard or symbolic links.

Or is this what you call "fumbling"

Yes, it is a mess but might get the job done.

Originally posted by: pneun68

Hi nagger,
thanks for the suggestion, this was also my first thought. Although i completely agree with you about the 37 years (i watched 22 of them) and so on, i cannot take your advice.
The customer is in finance and so is required to have his installation history documented as detailed as possible, this is the only reason to care about this issue.
We could achieve the goal to have the plain installation history in the ODM but the inventory of files would be faulty.
Plus: i always try to avoid halfway solutions, they come back to haunt you.

best regards

Andreas
Please avoid sending Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for details

Originally posted by: SystemAdmin

Blanks in filenames have been a part of unix for decades.

I suspect you are seeing problems with shell scripts involved.
Did you write the shell scripts?
Can you alter the shell scripts?

<SUGGESTION>
When I write shell scripts (which use blanks as the default delimiter),
I've acquired the habit of surrounding all arguments with ""s.
The ""s indicate that whatever is between (such as a variable or
inline execution that expands to include blanks) is treated as a
single word.
Occasionally, I have to remove the quotes (which habit inserts),
but the habit has tended to save me more time tracking down something
unintentionally broken into words.
When necessary to remove the quotes,
the failure has usually been quick to find (e.g. "cp abc def" not found).
</SUGGESTION>

In the 1980s and early 1990s, it was common to see packages expand into
their package directory with a one-line summary or simple usage instructions
as a long filename in the directory beginning with a blank and embedded with blanks in the directory. The filename served the same purpose that a
README.txt file serves without the need to do more than list the directory.

Hopefully helpful,

Originally posted by: pneun68

Hi DrB,
thank you for your suggestion.
The commands that fail are part of the IBM AIX BasicOperatingSystem and so cannot be changed at my will.
Although mkinstallp and its part makebff.pl are scripted and i could see and correct the erroneous parts it is impossible to have my variants rolled out in this BIG finance institution (customer).
Even worse ís the situation with installp as this is a RS6K-Binary, and the days i patched executables to make them work are long gone.
Funny thing is, i found out the old (around 1994) packaging commands that were delivered as RS6K-Binaries, they had the same problems.

Best regards

Andreas
Please avoid sending Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for details

Originally posted by: pneun68

Hi all,
thank you for your interest in the above issue.
My customer reported it to IBM AIX-Support and after adding some pressure we received the following answer:

"Blanks are not currently supported from an install perspective. There are no current plans to change it.
The customer is welcome to submit a DCR.
The install code is very complex and as noted below, there are other AIX commands that cannot handle it. So our use of it would require thorough testing to ensure that other problems are not caused by such a change."

So for the future: Beware if someone asks you to package software originating from the wintendo world.

best regards

Andreas

Please avoid sending Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html for details