On 01/20/10 08:10 AM, Eric J. Ray wrote:
> They should go on awaiting-sponsor, please.
Ok - will do.
Thanks.
Bonnie
>
> On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:02 AM, Bonnie Corwin wrote:
>
>> So where did we land on this?
>>
>> Are we putting them back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list or do they need to
>> be
They should go on awaiting-sponsor, please.
On Jan 20, 2010, at 8:02 AM, Bonnie Corwin wrote:
> So where did we land on this?
>
> Are we putting them back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list or do they need to be
> moved to the 'closed' list (because they aren't going to get fixed)?
>
> Thanks.
>
So where did we land on this?
Are we putting them back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list or do they need
to be moved to the 'closed' list (because they aren't going to get fixed)?
Thanks.
Bonnie
On 01/15/10 03:39 PM, Willi Burmeister wrote:
> Hi Ethan,
>
>> These three bugs are back on the 'awai
Hi Ethan,
> These three bugs are back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list because
> the sponsor is no longer with Sun.
>
> 6424003 - pkginfo -l can't handle long package names properly
> 606 - Package name length definitions inconsistent
> 6443055 - pkgchk and pkgtrans are not able to deal with 32
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 8:29 PM, James Carlson
wrote:
> Peter Tribble wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Ethan Quach wrote:
>>> FYI,
>>>
>>> These three bugs are back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list because
>>> the sponsor is no longer with Sun.
>>>
>>>
>>> 6424003 - pkginfo -l can't hand
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Ethan Quach wrote:
> FYI,
>
> These three bugs are back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list because
> the sponsor is no longer with Sun.
>
>
> 6424003 - pkginfo -l can't handle long package names properly
> 606 - Package name length definitions inconsistent
>
> 6443
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 8:29 PM, James Carlson
> wrote:
>> Won't these things still be issues for third-party packages?
>
> Third-party? Doubtful that they would use package names as long as
> SUNWstaroffice-gnome-integration.
Good point. Given that the packages would fa
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Ethan Quach wrote:
>> FYI,
>>
>> These three bugs are back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list because
>> the sponsor is no longer with Sun.
>>
>>
>> 6424003 - pkginfo -l can't handle long package names properly
>> 606 - Package name length de
FYI,
These three bugs are back on the 'awaiting sponsor' list because
the sponsor is no longer with Sun.
6424003 - pkginfo -l can't handle long package names properly
606 - Package name length definitions inconsistent
6443055 - pkgchk and pkgtrans are not able to deal with 32 char package