Based on your description that there is no architectural issue with
providing the probes on SPARC just a build environment issue.
Given what you described the way I would recommend that this case is
changed to provide the functionality on both platforms. The project
teams asks that due to the
sypnosis updated :)
[Seema Alevoor:]
| Looks fine, except the synopsis part.
|
| -- Seema.
|
| rahul wrote:
| > | The bugid 7 synopsis in the diffs seems wrong, isn't this one only
| > | about dtrace (6644707)?
| >
| > I had reused the older bug's workspace, and it seems the comment on
| > thos
> 1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
> Including MySQL 5.0 64bit and connectors with Solaris
This case timed out yesterday without any issues so I've marked it
closed approved.
--
Jyri J. Virkki - jyri.virkki at sun.com - Sun Microsystems
Looks fine, except the synopsis part.
-- Seema.
rahul wrote:
> | The bugid 7 synopsis in the diffs seems wrong, isn't this one only
> | about dtrace (6644707)?
>
> I had reused the older bug's workspace, and it seems the comment on
> those two files did not change. I will change it now.
>
>
Team!
Please review the webrev (same URL =
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~ss39446/ruby-cr6635728) which contain fixes
for both the problems mentioned in this CR (1. SUNWruby18u package
dependencies and 2. Presence of /usr/local/bin/ruby as #!)
Thanks
Siva
Sivakumar Shanmugasundaram wrote:
> Jyri
This looks much better. Thanks.
-- Garrett
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> Based on your description that there is no architectural issue with
>> providing the probes on SPARC just a build environment issue.
>>
>
> Darren,
> Yes, that's correct.
>
>> Given what you
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> I am unclear if the existence of a bug (6659110) is adequate
>> justification for not delivering this feature on SPARC. Particularly
>> given that the named bug has not even been evaluated for accuracy,
>> much less root caused or analyzed
Darren J Moffat wrote:
>
> Based on your description that there is no architectural issue with
> providing the probes on SPARC just a build environment issue.
>
> Given what you described the way I would recommend that this case is
> changed to provide the functionality on both platforms. The p
Hi ,
As part of the CR :6634053 Integrate MySQL 64-bit release ,I would like
the changes to be reviewed at
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~sunandam/6634053/
Please let me know your comments .
Thanks
--
Sunanda Menon
Database Technology Group
BLR03, x87098/91-80-66937098
Prashant Srinivasan wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> I am unclear if the existence of a bug (6659110) is adequate
>> justification for not delivering this feature on SPARC. Particularly
>> given that the named bug has not even been evaluated for accuracy,
>> much less root caused or analyzed
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> Based on your description that there is no architectural issue with
> providing the probes on SPARC just a build environment issue.
>
Darren,
Yes, that's correct.
> Given what you described the way I would recommend that this case is
> changed to provide the functio
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> I am unclear if the existence of a bug (6659110) is adequate
> justification for not delivering this feature on SPARC. Particularly
> given that the named bug has not even been evaluated for accuracy,
> much less root caused or analyzed for cost-to-fix.
The bug it sel
Richard Lowe wrote:
> Jyri Virkki writes:
>
>
>> I am sponsoring this case for Sivakumar and closing it approved automatic.
>> The only high[low]light is the feature disparity between x86 and SPARC.
>> If anyone would like to discuss it as a fast track let me know.
>>
>>
>
> It'd be nice i
| The bugid 7 synopsis in the diffs seems wrong, isn't this one only
| about dtrace (6644707)?
I had reused the older bug's workspace, and it seems the comment on
those two files did not change. I will change it now.
rahul
--
1. e4 _
Hi,
Refreshed diffs for mod_dtrace are available on the same location.
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~vrthra/6644707.dtrace/
Please do review.
rahul
--
1. e4 _
Jyri,
I was wrong in my assumption. Looks like the 'ruby installer' hard codes
#!/usr/local/bin/ruby into some of the .rb files. That was what the
comment was referring to.
I am pulling out this webrev. I will submit another one with the fix for
the /usr/local/bin/ruby issue as well.
Apologie
Jyri,
That is part of a feedback for another CR (code review submitted by
Chris Zhu), where the reviewer commented on the presence of
/usr/local/bin/ruby in the man.1 file.
Regards
Siva
Jyri Virkki wrote:
> Sivakumar Shanmugasundaram wrote:
>>
>> The webrev location is http://cr.opensolaris.or
Jyri Virkki wrote:
> Amanda Waite wrote:
>
> Not necessarily a question for this case, but is it possible for
> future packages to deliver additional configuration into a known
> location? For example apache2 packages can deliver .conf files into
> conf.d. Thinking of the example above, that wou
Jyri Virkki writes:
> I am sponsoring this case for Sivakumar and closing it approved automatic.
> The only high[low]light is the feature disparity between x86 and SPARC.
> If anyone would like to discuss it as a fast track let me know.
>
It'd be nice if the project team could go into why the di
I am unclear if the existence of a bug (6659110) is adequate
justification for not delivering this feature on SPARC. Particularly
given that the named bug has not even been evaluated for accuracy, much
less root caused or analyzed for cost-to-fix. Architecturally, this
would be far far more c
20 matches
Mail list logo
