APLawrence.com -  Resources for Unix and Linux Systems, Bloggers and the self-employed

SCO's "custom" problems

© May 2019 Anthony Lawrence

Link: SCO TA 125188

SCO's custom is amazingly bad software. Today I was configuring a system for a client, and after adding a driver for a Stallion card, going back into "custom" rewarded me with:

"Unable to start software manager. Possibly because it is 
already in use"

How nice. I thought there might be a lock, so I tried removing that, but no, same message. That's when I went looking and came across the above TA. The only hope it offers is to restore from backup - too bad this is a new install, in the process of being configured: no backup yet. As to finding a system that "has the same set of software and patches installed", well, that was pretty unlikely too.

Well, nothing much to lose, right? I figured that the problem had to have come from the Stallion install, so, using the example "find" commands from the TA, I tracked it down and simply removed it: "rm -f". I then downloaded a fresh copy of Stallion, put it on a new floppy, and custom happily installed it. I then went on to put in the 3Com driver that I had been thwarted on.

My question is, why do people design software that craps out when it runs into ONE corrupt file in everything it is looking at? I certainly don't: just skip the stupid thing, report an error and move on. Every other "stanza" (I just love the high falutin terminology - especially when it's used in the context of inferior software!) was fine, so why not just work with what you have? Why make the user guess where the problem is? It's not like these things are related: they are separate items.

True, "custom" can't remove something it couldn't get a good read on, but so what? Is that worth crippling everything by refusing to run? Sure, it MIGHT be something very important, indespensable, life threatening and all that, but why not just hope for the best and proceed? You can explain the problem, give all the caveats, make 'em press "Y" thirty times if you must, but why bail out? It's just plain stupid.

Well, I have no idea if it's OK to do this as a general procedure. It worked here, and it's worth tucking away in the back of your mind if push comes to shove somewhere else.

Got something to add? Send me email.

(OLDER)    <- More Stuff -> (NEWER)    (NEWEST)   

Printer Friendly Version

-> SCO's 'custom' problems

Inexpensive and informative Apple related e-books:

Take control of Apple TV, Second Edition

Photos for Mac: A Take Control Crash Course

iOS 10: A Take Control Crash Course

Digital Sharing Crash Course

Take Control of iCloud, Fifth Edition

More Articles by © Tony Lawrence

Printer Friendly Version

Have you tried Searching this site?

This is a Unix/Linux resource website. It contains technical articles about Unix, Linux and general computing related subjects, opinion, news, help files, how-to's, tutorials and more.

Contact us

Printer Friendly Version

C++: NSStringWithoutYourMothersHatButWithNiceCandyFrosting - aargh! (Tony Lawrence)

Linux posts

Troubleshooting posts

This post tagged:




Unix/Linux Consultants

Skills Tests

Unix/Linux Book Reviews

My Unix/Linux Troubleshooting Book

This site runs on Linode