http://bugs.grommit.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462
mike.kupfer at sun.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |ON migration
--- Comment #8 fro
JimC> usr/src/tools/scripts/nightly.1
JimC>
JimC> 275: should add back in "This is the source to be built."
I took that phrase out for a variety of reasons. In particular, it
could be read to imply that only this source will be built, which will
not be true for internal builds with separate (b
> SCM Migration Project Tool Usage Survey
Warning: my answers are really boring.
> What tools have you used from the SCM Migration Project?
webrev, nightly, wx (edit, backup, restore, webrev)
> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/scm-migration/
>
> When was the last time you used them?
Yesterda
> "Darren" == Darren Reed writes:
Darren> It might be useful for the SCM team to keep around a teamware
Darren> gate for people to putback into that have been using teamware
Darren> for some time.
The problem with that approach is that you can then get conflicts
between the changes in the
Mark J. Nelson wrote:
>
> Apologies for multiple copies, as many aliases were bcc'd.
>
> Howdy--
>
> If you have used the mercurial-enabled SUNWonbld packages from the
> scm-migration opensolaris project page, either because you downloaded
> them or you use the Burlington build servers, plea
he string "str" against the
extended regualr expression pattern "foo.*bar"
> After we integrate, I anticipate opening onnv-scm back up to ongoing work,
> until such time as external folks are better able to integrate to the
> "real" gate. But don't chisel that into stone.
Ok...
Bye,
Roland
--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \O;)
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: webrev.sh
Type: application/x-sh
Size: 68632 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/scm-migration-dev/attachments/20080531/28501c00/attachment.sh>
"Mark J. Nelson" wrote:
> >> Did you find any issues?
> >
> > Yes... the ksh scripts should be "ksh93 -n " clean (which
> > does some simple lint-like checking) - which isn't AFAIK done yet...
> > ... which leads to a question: Is there a webrev where I can look at the
> > changes ?
>
> Caveat: th
