On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 16:50 -0600, Brian Cameron wrote: > Stephen: > > > RRDTool is pretty generic in what it does and could be used to record > > and graph any time series data although admitedly most of the current > > applications of the tool are monitoring some system attribute or > > another. I think the graphing part of the tool points me at using lsarc > > but I will let JohnF decide where to submit it. > > That makes sense. By the way, what is the motivation for adding RRDTool > to Solaris? Only because it is useful, or also because something else > depends upon it?
Its just a useful piece of software. We are not shipping anything that depends on it. > >>> and about importing volatile interfaces and the > >> > requirement for signed contracts with the owners of those interfaces. > >> > >> You need a contract to import Volatile interfaces, unless you are > >> in the same consolidation. So, if this project is in the JDS > >> consolidation, you don't need a contract for libart_lgpl. Otherwise > >> you do. > > > > Yes I understand how it works, I was just wondering if the same rules > > applied for indiana. > > I believe so. > > > Thanks. I guessed we had an exisiting contract. > > > > Note these URLs are probably not that useful outside SUN :) > > Sorry about that. > > >> I remember, about a year ago, we discussed with LSARC whether we > >> needed to get a contract to use GCC to build a few JDS components > >> (liboil and libcdio - though we no longer shiop libcdio). I remember > >> that it was determined we did not need a contract. So I don't think > >> you need a contract for libgcc. > >> > >> By the way, in what case do you see libgcc is Volatile? It seems to > >> be External in this case: > > > > You're the ARC guy :) Volatile is the new name for External. > > See > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/policies/interface-taxonomy/#EXPSARC > > I normally see people refer to the stability level as defined in the > case rather than doing translations in their Imported Interface Table > (e.g. External->Volatile). I remember that when the new taxonomy was > released, there was some wiggle-room where projects could redefine > External to either Volatile or Uncommitted. So it might not always be > accurate to assume the translations apply to a given interface. Well thats not what the mapping table on opensolaris says. It notes Volatile as a direct name change of External. It lists Evolving as either Committed or Uncomitted. It is not for me to upgrade someone elses interface classification. I have seen a lot of confusion around these classifications over the years and I dont see the value in using multiple labels in the same case. I was going for consistency. > Therefore, it is probably safer to list "External" unless there is a > newer case where the interface owner has clarified it as Volatile. If you are saying the table is wrong then get it updated, please. > Normally in the Imported Interface table you list the ARC case which > defines the stability level for the interface in the comment column. > Since you didn't list a case, it wasn't clear to me what case you were > referring to. For all I know, there might be a newer case than the > one I referred to. This is probably not a big deal, but perhaps > explains my confusion. It is listed in the file I sent out (PSARC/2004/742) so I don't understand your confusion. I listed all the case numbers for the imported interfaces and feel I spent far too long looking for them. I wish there was an easy way to do that. Also, since you didn't mention the case you were refering to and by your own admission it is difficult to know which is the latest case for an interface for all I know there IS a newer case. Stephen. > Brian
