Dave Miner wrote:
> William Schumann wrote:
>> Dave Miner wrote:
>>> William Schumann wrote:
>>>> Sundar Yamunachari wrote:
>>>>> My usage of Major, Minor and Micro release doesn't conform the 
>>>>> Solaris definitions. Even though OpenSolaris is not going to 
>>>>> follow Solaris 10 update model, I am giving an example from 
>>>>> Solaris 10. If the system has  Solaris 10 update 2 build 6 (may be 
>>>>> beta), how will you represent this release?
>>>> For this, I propose:
>>>> MICROREV=<microrev> (optional)
>>>> and
>>>> FULL_VERSION=VERSION.REV[.MICROREV]
>>>> where <microrev>  is <micro revision number>[a | b | ...]
>>>>
>>>> Your example would be FULL_VERSION=10.2.6b
>>>>
>>> How is that different than the BUILD_ID?
>> An example of the build ID would be 'snv_79a'.  Internally at Sun, 
>> build ID is what is currently used to refer to versions.  At this 
>> point, it's just a different convention for representing the same 
>> notion as in FULL_VERSION.  Perhaps BUILD_ID could be dropped, but 
>> some people might still like to see it. 
>
> In the example above, you converted Sundar's build number to a 
> micro-revision, so I'm not understanding what the difference is.
Making the first Indiana release as an example:

$ cat /var/sadm/system/admin/INST_RELEASE
OS=Solaris - could be OpenSolaris, I suppose...
VERSION=11  - major version number
REV=1 - major update number - 1 for Indiana, 0 for Nevada
MICROREV=1 - build number (integer) starting from 1 as build IDs do in 
Nevada.  Currently, a new build usually comes every 2 weeks.
BUILD_ID=sin_1   - for Solaris INdiana, maybe
FULL_VERSION=11.1.1

...where BUILD_ID=<some string representing Solaris major version> 
concatenated with <MICROREV>  - For Nevada, this string is "snv_" - if 
we still want to keep the notion of a build ID, it might be something 
like "sin_" for Indiana.

...where FULL_VERSION=VERSION, REV, and MICROREV concatenated with 
periods separating them.  It repeats information but makes it clear how 
a complete version number is composed and standardizes the appearance.  
We could eliminate VERSION, REV, and MICROREV as long as 
set_release_info() (from this proposal) or some similar convenience 
function enforces this format - I don't see a significant difference 
either way.

If I understand Sundar correctly and that his beta is what we refer to 
as a respin,
MICROREV=6b for the 2nd respin of build 6, which refers to the same 
build as:
BUILD_ID=sin_6b

So MICROREV and BUILD_ID are only different in that BUILD_ID has a 
prefix, which people are accustomed to seeing on builds.
William

Reply via email to