Clay Baenziger wrote: > Hi Ethan, > This does apply to beadm but beadm doesn't introduce any special > differences in support. What works for the rest of Caiman should work > for BE code. Further, as the webrev shows some BE code was updated in > this work.
Running a couple of BE commands on a live system just for sanity sake wouldn't be that much effort. > > Unfortunately, these changes don't address 8841 as this does nothing > for our code being 2.5, 2.6 or 3 compatible. Okay, didn't realize that is the scope of 8841. thanks, -ethan > > Thank you, > Clay > > On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Ethan Quach wrote: > >> Clay, >> >> Regarding comment #1 in the defect, why wouldn't this >> apply to beadm? It's coded toward 2.4 just like our other >> apps in the gate, so if/when the system's /usr/bin/python >> no longer points to 2.4 as the default, is beadm potentially >> broken? >> >> Don't these changes address 8841 as well? Are they dups? >> >> >> thanks, >> -ethan >> >> >> Clay Baenziger wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> For bug 9804 (Need to ensure all python #! paths in install code >>> have version number) it seems that to test this change doing a DC >>> build and AI install should test many of the files touched. Doing >>> this test was successful. >>> I believe this change to be a completely functionally identical >>> change (i.e. /usr/bin/python is a symlink right now to >>> /usr/bin/python2.4 anyways). Could someone review that I changed >>> only the #! Python lines and that my testing method seems reasonable? >>> Thank you, >>> Clay >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~clayb/9804/ >>> Bug: >>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9804 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> caiman-discuss mailing list >>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss >>
