Solaris 11 active process discovery without /usr/ucb

[Paul Ciarfella]

The Solaris probe "Solaris - Active Processes" requires /usr/ucb/ps.   But our server architect is against installing /usr/ucb and polluting the beauty of the Solaris installation with outside packages.

Has anyone successfully modified active process discovery to support Solaris 11 without /usr/ucb installed?       Discovery documentation says its required for Solaris 10 and below, and /usr/bin/ps for Solaris 11, but the probes definitely do not work on Solaris 11 if /usr/ucb is not installed.

I'm thinking we're going to need to write a custom probe assuming that the output from /usr/bin/ps can be output in a compatible digestible format.

[karmeng]

Hi Paul,

/usr/ucb is needed for Solaris 11 as Discovery need to use this command for output.

Documentation

UNIX and Linux commands requiring root privileges for Discovery and Orchestration

KB:

ServiceNow Customer Service System

I hope this sufficient to convince the server architect

Thank you.

Regards,

Kar Meng

[Paul Ciarfella]

Thanks for pointing out the documentation.   I didn't notice that it was updated in Helsinki.

That's probably not enough to convince the architect and we'd need to update over 300 production servers, which is another big roadblock.

We'll see if we can modify the probe to get at least some of the running process information.

[Paul Ciarfella · Accepted solution]

So the answer is that Solaris 11 provides a backwards compatibility option for /usr/bin/ps to generate output that matches the ucb version of ps.

For example, the "Solaris - Active Processes" probe runs "/usr/ucb/ps -awwx" to get process information.

The equivalent Solaris 11 ps command is "/usr/bin/ps awwx".   Eliminating the leading '-' in the command arg tells ps to go retro and run like the ucb ps.

I modified the bash script in the probe to check the OS version and run the ucb ps or the Solaris 11 ps depending on OS (11 or 5.11 for example).

[karmeng]

Hi Paul,

Thanks for your update. Sounds that you found the workaround for the issue by modified the bash script. Glad you update the result and I believe it will benefit community members who have similar requirement .

Appreciate if you can mark this thread as answered with the comment that you provide earlier.

Regards,

Kar Meng