Hi Joe,
On 03/31/09 23:02, Joseph J. VLcek wrote: > jan damborsky wrote: >> Hi, >> >> could I please ask for reviewing changes for following bugs ? >> >> 6492 DC manifest does not allow for fully qualified FMRI package names >> 7784 Install fails when specifying branch (build) in manifest >> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=6492 >> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=7784 >> >> webrev: >> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~dambi/bug-6492-7784 >> >> Thank you very much, >> Jan >> >> modules affected: >> ----------------- >> * DC & AI manifests >> >> testing done: >> ------------- >> * LiveCD based on build 106 built from http://ipkg.sfbay/dev >> with following list of packages: >> >> <pkg name="entire at 0.5.11-0.106"/> >> <pkg name="SUNWcsd"/> >> <pkg name="SUNWcs"/> >> <pkg name="slim_install at 0.1-0.106"/> >> <pkg name="SUNWslim-utils at 0.5.11-0.106"/> >> >> Resulting image booted fine. >> >> * AI installation done with 110 AI image with >> following list of package specified in manifest: >> >> <ai_install_packages> >> <pkg name="entire at 0.5.11-0.110"/> >> <pkg name="SUNWcsd"/> >> <pkg name="SUNWcs"/> >> <pkg name="babel_install"/> >> </ai_install_packages> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> caiman-discuss mailing list >> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss > usr/src/cmd/ai-webserver/default.xml > usr/src/cmd/auto-install/ai_manifest.xml > usr/src/cmd/distro_const/slim_cd/all_lang_slim_cd_x86.xml > usr/src/cmd/distro_const/slim_cd/slim_cd_x86.xml > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Nit: Just a suggestion on the comment wording. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Jan, I don't mean for this comment to reflect poorly on your > English. I just thought this sounded better. Your English is > far better than my Czech, or any other language for that matter. Thanks :-) Actually, foreign languages are not my strong point, so those kind of comments are alway appreciated :-) > > Anyway here is my suggestion. Apply it if you think it sounds better. > > If you decide to make it, I don't feel this change requires any > further testing. I have incorporated suggested changes and updated the webrev - in case you would like to take a look. > > Please consider changing from: > 34 By default, latest build available in given IPS > 35 repository is installed. > 36 If other build is required, build number has > 37 to be appended to the 'entire' package in following > 38 form: > > To: > 34 By default the latest build available, in the > specified IPS > 35 repository, is installed. > 36 If another build is required, the build number has > 37 to be appended to the 'entire' package in following > 38 form: > > Question: > --------- > > > Is there situation where any package, besides 'entire', would need to > have the build number appended to it? According to the David's comment, appending build number just to 'entire' should be sufficient starting build 110. For older builds, version should be appended to other packages as well - it is planned to be documented in FAQ section. > > > usr/src/cmd/distro_const/ValidatorModule.py > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Je dobra (is good ;) Understood :-) Thank you very much for review ! Jan
