On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Alan Coopersmith<[email protected]> wrote: > Aubrey Li wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Chavdar Ivanov<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> SX-CE snv_121 seems to be working pretty well for me, so I'd expect any >>> time /dev to be upgraded to the same (there is some problem with compiz >>> using Intel graphics - it starts, but displays white screen; I haven't had >>> the time yet to figure out this). >>> >>> Chavdar Ivanov >> >> We can safely bfu to 121, any difference between bfu 121 and the 121 in >> /dev? > > Lots - bfu only installs a small fraction of the OS - less than 20%, > just the kernel, most (not all) drivers, and some core libraries & utilities > - only the ON consolidation, not SFW, X, GNOME, man pages, > or other consolidations. BFU also doesn't include some of the changes > applied to the IPS packages, like replacing /bin/sh with ksh93 and > vi with vim. > > -- > -Alan Coopersmith- [email protected] > Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
Thanks, that can explain why bfu failed if the bfu version is far away from the version on the system. Regards, -Aubrey _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
