On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 01:20:26PM -0700, Dan Price wrote: > On Wed 24 Sep 2008 at 05:00PM, Brad Hall wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 03:27:49PM -0700, Danek Duvall wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 03:36:51PM -0700, Brad Hall wrote: > > > > > > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bhall/bug-388-2/ > > I'm sorry to be late on comments about this RFE. As I was falling > asleep last night it occurred to me that we should probably take > a ZFS snapshot (via the BE stuff) if we decide that any fixing is > needed. This could be a boon if the fix goes wrong somehow, or if > the user wants to i.e. go back to the pre-fixed state.
That's a good point -- I'll add support for that. > The other thing that occurred to me was that fix might not work > properly for certain cases-- such as the libc case, where we mount > the processor specific libc over top of the real libc... there must > be code in 'verify' that copes with this somehow, but I'm not clear > where that code actually lives. Not currently sure what to do in that case; but yes, we should handle it. Thanks, Brad _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
