Jim Dunham wrote: >> Adding Jim to the cc: for the definitive answer on why the version >> number is 11.11.0 for that cluster... > > This is a carry over from when AVS was built out of the NWS > Consolidation, where that build environment generated a value called > OS_VER, and then used this value for OS specific makefile processing. > During AVS's move from the NWS Consolidation to the ON Consolidation > at snv_101, the individual doing the work did not know what to replace > OS_VER with, so as a means to mitigate risk, the old NWS value of > 11.11 was used in its place. > > If there is a viable reason to change this value to something else, > please submit a CR.
From responses by Danek and David, it looks like we'd like it to be something else (0.1). Which category/sub-category should I file a bug against in Bugster? In the meantime, I'll adjust the version line in the IPS package cluster definition. >>> Also, could you give the bug a decent synopsis? "Package manager >>> dependencies" suggests there's a bug in the GUI, and dependencies >>> aren't >>> ordered, etc. > > I see that the synopsis has been changed. Does this mean that all > other SRV4 packages that may not have programatically convert into IPS > packages with a correct dependency list, have now been identified, and > resolved too? Identified, yes. See: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=5268 Resolved, no. Individual bugs will be filed under opensolaris/packaging as needed. > When there is a set of IPS packages for AVS with corrected > dependencies, I would be willing to test them for correct behavior. Okay. I'll point you at my local repository, when I've made the changes that David requested in an earlier email. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
