Roland Mainz wrote:
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> Roland Mainz wrote:
>>> The current solution for libcmd based on Sun's prefernce for
>>> backwards-compatibilty and MANY MANY other issues were addressed this
>>> way, too. Just renaming the Solaris version of libcmd.so and annouce a
>>> "flag day" isn't even 5% of the work which would need to be done (and I
>>> expect around three/four months/engineer to get that propperly done).
>> If the Solaris libcmd were to be renamed, I could have X & CDE modified
>> to use the new one in less than an hour. JDS would probably take about as
>> long if we asked the JDS guys. You could avoid flag day pain by adding
>> a symlink or the function filters for a couple builds to allow the other
>> consolidations to transition and then drop it once everyone has.
>> (Unless special arrangements are made, X, CDE, and JDS normally build their
>> packages for Solaris Nevada build "n" on systems installed with Solaris
>> Nevada build n-2. We have made special arrangements when needed, such
>> as when coordinating the Trusted Extensions integration across the
>> consolidations.)
>
> What about Solaris 10 ? Would it be possible to make a "flag day" for
> that OS release which covers all affected consolidations (e.g. consumers
> of libcmd.so) ?
Yes - it's trickier, but doable.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
