>From the way I understand how PCA works, when specifying a specific revision of a patch, it does no checking prior to trying to install, since it can't reference pre-reqs and supercedings in patchdiag.xref. As a test, I grabbed the patch list from the CPU readme and fed it into PCA, it downloaded and tried to apply all 209 patches.
I prefer to stick with only the revisions in the CPU, since I hope there is a greater chance they are well tested before released. You don't need to look any further then the last couple weeks when kernel patches 144488-13 through 144488-15 were withdrawn. On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Glenn Satchell <glenn.satch...@uniq.com.au>wrote: > Unless the specific patch is already installed, so it should only download > the new patches. So this is a win over downloading the whole 2GB patch > bundle. > > If you strip the revision numbers off the list and use that, pca will get > the latest version of each patch. The CPU revisions are not necessarily > always the latest version. > > regards, > -glenn > > > From what I understand about how PCA works, if you specify a specific > > patch > > revision in a list, it isn't able to check supercedings and dependencies, > > because it doesn't have a match in patchdiag.xref. So you would still > end > > up downloading all the patches and trying to apply them. > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Gael Martinez > > <gael.marti...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Jeff <variver...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> What would be even better is if the CPU contained a copy of > >>> patchdiag.xref that can be used by PCA users to replicate the CPU. > >>> > >> > >> Why don't you use the patch_order file included in the CPU ? pca does > >> accept a list of patch in a file ... > >> > >> -- > >> Gaël Martinez > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Jeff > > > > > > -- Jeff
