kereni
2nd January 2003, 09:32
Version: Triton on TBASE
System: IBM
Starting 1/1/2003 unable to login to the system and getting error 'No Permissions to run at this time'.
Only user 'root' can login.
When changing the date to 31/12/2002 the users can login.
Any idea?
Thanks
kereni
OmeLuuk
2nd January 2003, 10:24
What does your enddate of validation tell you?
licmon6.1 -b
Brand information from brand file:
Organization :
Cust. code :
Licencenr. :
Options :
Ba users :
Bx/bw users :
Start date : 02-04-1998
End date : 31-12-9999
Machine id :
Servers :
If the date is 31-12-2002 then revalidate your software...
kereni
2nd January 2003, 10:28
The end date: 31-12-2099
wfitsh
2nd January 2003, 16:10
We have also this Problem on our HP-UX-Server....
Version: Triton 3.1
Portingset: PA.0009 from Sept.1995 !!!
OS: HP-UX 9.0
Only Superuser(!) can work with Triton...
Dikkie Dik
2nd January 2003, 18:13
Heared that it is caused by a not Y2K complaint portingset. So, install a correct one and you should be out of trouble. :cool:
Kind regards,
Dick
sant123
2nd January 2003, 18:49
Got the same problem today, only super users can login, enddate is 12/31/2099 and the porting set is 6.1b.02.
which is the next available y2k complient porting set we should install.
Dikkie Dik
3rd January 2003, 09:12
Baan always advices to use the latest. From my point of view I also think this version has lots of (performance) improvements compared to versions of 2 years ago.
Kinds regards,
Dick
kereni
6th January 2003, 15:53
our Triton version is 3.0 and porting set 6.0.04
OmeLuuk
6th January 2003, 18:34
triton 3.1 can run on portingset 6.1c.06.06 (latest) but I am not sure if 3.0 still is supported...
gatzie
7th January 2003, 04:03
I've also encountered that in AIX and also in NT. As a work-around you can try setting the user with the administrator right.(Of course there's an security issue on this, that's why you must handle it rightly). Then try logging in using the user account. Then post if you were successful.
wfitsh
7th January 2003, 09:58
The Problem is the year 2003. Some system´s date begin at the 1.1.1970. So the difference between the year 2003 and 1970 is 33!!!!! Ah, you know?
So, only if you are a TRITON-Normaluser, the bshell does a check of the logindate, if you are allowed to start the bshell. And that is the Y2K-moment ;-)
The BShell doesn´t check the superusers.
dave_23
7th January 2003, 18:15
Baan has posted the oldest porting set that doesn't have
this problem (the first y2k complaint one) for those of you
who do not want to upgrade:
This is 6.1c.04.01
ftp://ftp.baan.com/public/PortingSet/61C04~1.01
OmeLuuk
8th January 2003, 10:01
wfitsh: So the difference between the year 2003 and 1970 is 33!!!!! Ah, you know?... does not ring a bell to me.... what about this?
Yet another Q: what if the system is triton2.2 or lower? Does that latest portingset have the same problem?
patvdv
8th January 2003, 10:49
Originally posted by OmeLuuk
... does not ring a bell to me.... what about this?
Mmm, let me guess: Baan was founded amidst a strict religious community and Jesus died at age 33?
OmeLuuk
8th January 2003, 10:59
hmmm Pat, I do not like this post, being Luke myself...
patvdv
8th January 2003, 11:37
It was only a personal guess Lucas. Sorry if it offended you.
tina.guntner
8th January 2003, 15:48
Yes, Triton 2.2 has the same problem with normal user logins.
OmeLuuk
8th January 2003, 18:29
OmeLuuk: ... does not ring a bell to me.... what about this?I have given it a second thought: 33 being 1 more than 32 which is 2^5 maybe makes sense... the internal representation of the yearpart of the date as 5bit number...Yet another Q: what if the system is triton2.2 or lower? Does that latest portingset have the same problem?My intention here was: does the latest portingset for triton (5.0.0010 or so) solve this issue too?
tina.guntner
8th January 2003, 18:34
Problem exists in version below...
-------------------------------------------------------
Porting set : 5.0.0005
Version : bshell5.0 version 01-1994/R1
Port no. : FB.0163
Date : Mon Jan 10 09:31:23 MET 1994
Uname : HP-UX ed5c13 A.09.01 E 9000/735 2004124180 8-user license
Machine-id : HP9000_700_800
OS-release : A.09.00
CFLAGS : -I/od/src5.0.5/rel5.0/headers -I/od/src5.0.5/rel5.0/lib/ds_1 -I
LOADFLAGS :
-------------------------------------------------------
OmeLuuk
8th January 2003, 18:42
you can obtain a newer on the baan site:
/updates/port/5.0.0010/HP/10.01/bin/bin.dmp.Z
-------------------------------------------------------
Porting set : 5.0.0010
Version : bshell5.0 version 01-1994/R1
Port no. : PA.0761
Date : Thu Oct 22 12:09:25 MET 1998
Uname : HP-UX larani B.10.01 A 9000/821 2010082042 two-user license
Machine-id : HP9000_RISC
OS-release : A.10.01
CFLAGS : +O3 +DS1.0 +DA1.0 +Onolimit -I/portingsets/src5.0.10/rel5.0/heade
rs -I/portingsets/src5.0.10/rel5.0/lib/ds_1 -I/portingsets/src5.0.10/rel5.0/mir/
ds_link -I/portingsets/src5.0.10/rel5.0/licence -I/portingsets/src5.0.10/rel4.3/
headers -DHP9000_RISC -DA_10_01 -DREL5_0 -D_CLASSIC_TYPES -DTTYBUG -DHPUX -DHP90
00_800 -DNOSETEUID -DINCLSTDLIB -D_HPUX_SOURCE -DSYSV_PT -I/usr/include/X11R5 -D
DS -DDICT5_0 -DLICENCE -DDD_MAP -DSHM_ALLOC -DOPEN_DEBUG -DSYSTIME -DNOSELEC
TH -DSOCKET -DLOCAL_SOCKET -DPIPE -DMQ -DSHM -DDWORDSIZ -DSELECTINTYPES -DCU
SERIDBUG -DVOID_PTR -DSCANF_OK -DSYSMEMFUN -DIS_OPEN_BUG -DSLOTIO -DWRITEV -
DHIGH_LOW -DBLK_DEFINE_4K -DUNSET_BADFILE -DSIGNAL_TYPE=void -DSEM_LOCK
LOADFLAGS :
-------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (c) 1990-1998 Baan Development B.V.
Tell me if this solves your problem.
wfitsh
8th January 2003, 18:47
I think it doesn't work on HP-UX 9.00, because of OS-Release 10.01.
We´ve testet a 10.0-portingset on a HP-UX 9.00 machine and it doesn't work.
The easiest way is to change the HP-UX-Server.
patvdv
8th January 2003, 19:02
My goodness, are you seriously still working on HP-UX 9.0? :eek:
wfitsh
8th January 2003, 19:04
It's still better than nothing
tina.guntner
8th January 2003, 19:14
Thanks for all the responses, nice to know that I have an alternative when BaaN support doesn't respond! Since the OS would also have to be updated to be able to utilize the newer porting set, will try to re-set system date - backwards to 2000 - will let you know result tomorrow.
patvdv
8th January 2003, 21:59
Originally posted by wfitsh
It's still better than nothing
I guess that's true but I hope you get to upgrade some day soon!
Han Brinkman
9th January 2003, 12:42
Unix counts from 1-1-1970, in seconds.
2^31 = 2147483648 seconds ~ 35791394 min ~ 596523 hours ~ 24855 days ~ 69 years
So enddate of a 32 bit Unix OS is somewhere in 2039.
Who is using a 32 bit OS from now in 2039???
OmeLuuk
9th January 2003, 14:33
That is true Han, and that is what I know to be the next limit. But how could you explain this phenomenon?
kereni
9th January 2003, 14:48
The 6.1c.x porting set is not complement with Triton 3.0. All files under ${BSE}/bin folder are with xxxx6.0 extension. The only porting set that we can use is 6.0.x and the latest that available on BGS FTP site is 6.0.05.
kereni
tina.guntner
9th January 2003, 15:24
For our Triton 2.2 legacy system, the year was reset to 2000, after some preliminary testing everything appears to be okay. Data is now accessible to normal users, with understanding that 'date' printed on reports is not current date. This is acceptable for us as this system is for reference only.