Yes, that is correct. We will be filing a separate PSARC case for any cfgadm changes. Sorry for the confusion, I should have removed it when we updated the PSARC case.
-Geeta >-----Original Message----- >From: Michael.Corcoran at Sun.COM [mailto:Michael.Corcoran at Sun.COM] >Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 3:46 PM >To: Jerry Gilliam >Cc: Michael Corcoran; PSARC-ext at Sun.COM; Krishna, Geetanjali; Liu, Jiang; >Raj, Ashok; Kasten, Robert A; Sherry.Moore at Sun.COM; Wesley.Shao at Sun.COM; >Vikram Hegde; Dana.Myers at Sun.COM; Mara.Roccaforte at Sun.COM >Subject: Re: Update to Hot-Plug Support for ACPI-based Systems >[PSARC/2009/104 02/20/2009] > >Hi All, > >I was requested to clarify that the changes to the cfgadm_sbd man page >and section 4.1.2.3 will be moved to a new PSARC case since the code >for this PSARC case will not be putting back those changes since those >areas of code have not been touched. I'll post a pointer to the new >case which contains these once it is filed. > >Thanks, > >Mike > >On Jul 29, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Jerry Gilliam wrote: > >> >> No issues have been raised and no request to reset the case to >> a full fast-track, so this case is approved relative to the >> amended materials. >> >> >> thx, >> -jg
