On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:00:08 +0000
Darren J Moffat <Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM> wrote:

> James C. McPherson wrote:
> > The name "fwflash" was suggested by PSARC in an earlier
> > case and agreed to by that particular project team. 
> > 
> > In your opinion, which aspect of the name "fwflash" is
> > not descriptive enough, and what do you suggest we call
> > this utility instead?
> 
> I don't see changing the name of the already existing fwflash command
> is in scope for this project.  fwflash(1M) was declared as Stable in 
> 2005/126 which makes it Committed in the new taxonomy.  This case
> needs "patch" release binding so changing the name is not an option.

I totally agree.


James
--
Senior Kernel Software Engineer, Solaris
Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.sun.com/jmcp       http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog

Reply via email to