** Reply to message from "Lan Barnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:14:59 -0700 (PDT)
> Also consider CM and QA. Over the years, you may have 3 or more separate > build environments (OS, compiler ver, ancillary tools and libs) per > development cycle. You will wnat these to be immediately available, and > for years to come, for reliable rebuildability. Years ago on a UNIX box(HP9000) we had all these on the one box but also had a ton of nice scripts to allow us to easily build our code and tie it into any of the environments we needed to. QA did the same and then took the code to the hardware they'd be testing on( sonar system ). VMs make it easy if you don't have a system of keeping things in their places. You can either use the bento box or separate plates for everything. The plates are cheap and everyone knows what a plate is so it's "easier". > > In windoze OR Linux, VM is a godsend to SCM. Before VM we documented it > and prayed no one ever asked us to do a rebuild in later years. In the PC environment, it is nice to have the whole kit-and-kaboodle wrapped up and ready to be fired up in a moments notice. I've already retired some of my old systems to VM images on my raid box just so I can some day get to them to see what I should keep and what should be thrown away. Sure beats keeping that old hardware around but still being able to work in the old desktop env. And agreed, when a customer with old old software wants to pay for support, you can now fire up what they are running to see just what the heck they might be wanted to have fixed. Doug -- KPLUG-List@kernel-panic.org http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
