Hi, V st, 18. 02. 2009 v 18:56, James Carlson p??e: > Roland Mainz writes: > > Peter Memishian wrote: > > > > > > > Why so many complains for one simple bug? > > > > > > It is not one simple bug, it is the latest in a sequence of bugs related > > > to this change. There is a case to be made that some of these bugs could > > > have been caught prior to integration given more testing, such as 6790805 > > > and 6793120. There were also more subtle bugs (such as 6805584) that I > > > doubt we would've caught. There are others that have not yet been > > > root-caused, such as 6800517. > > > > Erm... what is http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6800517 ? > > It's a failure in an internal name service switch test suite. > > Nobody knows what the problem is (it hasn't been root-caused yet), or > if any of the later fixes address it, but the workaround is to remove > the ksh93 /usr/bin/sleep from the system and replace with the old > binary. >
Which is not easy to analyze based on that particular test suite. But with sleep involved and that test suite playing with NIS+ server and nscd it is probably CR 6807422, which is based on sleep "~ regression", CR 6807179. I will try to find some time to look at it later. Best regards, Milan
