Good, I'm glad this is already being worked on. Thanks,
-paul On 05/22/09 17:29, Ethan Quach wrote: > > > Paul Neary wrote: >> I had this problem below on build 111b which poses interesting >> questions for future compatibility of OSOL releases. >> >> o I install an AI server using 2009.06 CD >> o I set up both SPARC and X86 clients using default manifests >> (pointing to pkg.opensolaris.org/release) >> o The X86 client installed fine. >> o The SPARC client croaked with >> "... >> ict_installboot Command /usr/bin/env -i PATH=/usr/bin >> /usr/sbin/installboot -F zfs /a/platform/sun4v/lib/fs/zfs/bootblk >> /dev/rdsk/c6t0d0s0 failed with 256 >> <OM May 19 19:43:57> >> installboot failed >> ... >> See full log file in attachments >> >> I guess that since 2008.11 didn't support AI on SPARC then I've >> inadvertently tried to do something that's not supported. Also, this >> only happens right now because pkg.opensolaris.org/release is >> pointing to 2008.11. When we actually release 2009.06 this will >> point to 2009.06. >> >> The only way a customer will encounter this problem is if they have >> already cloned a 2008.11 repo and then use 2009.06 AI to install on >> sparc while pointing to their old repository. >> Questions I have are, >> 1. Should this fact be release noted for 2009.06? > > There is a note in the AI documentation stating that the > build number or release being installed must match the build > number or release of the AI iso image used to install it. > > Though it does not necessarily hint that the repository specified > in the manifest can dictate the build being installed. It only > refers to > how the pkg list specification can be modified to dictate the build > number. > > IMO the issue as stated doesn't need to be additionally release noted. > >> 2. Are 2009.06 AI and all subsequent releases going to be compatible >> with repositories from earlier releases (x86 and SPARC)? If not, >> deliberately checking for compatible/incompatible repositories and >> failing gracefully would be nicer than an obscure failure (as in this >> case). Does this qualify as a possible RFE? > > This is bug 7837 > > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=7837 > > being actively worked on, project page here: > > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/CVERS/ > > > thanks, > -ethan > >
