On 17/04/10 04:33 PM, Albert Lee wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:47:07 -0700, Danek Duvall<danek.duv...@oracle.com>
wrote:
I think it's mostly a technical reason. In particular, I don't think
that
there are any legal reasons why the respins are kept internally. The
gatekeeping staff may correct me if that's the case.
Well, I'll be damned. Jürgen Keil saves the day (at least for ON) ;)
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-April/055854.html
Full changelogs and everything. Only thing left to wish for is updated
Mercurial bundles.
We haven't been creating per-build bundle files for quite
some time now, since it's been apparent that if you can get
tip from the onnv-gate repo on hg.opensolaris.org, then
you can search for the tag which marks a particular scheduled
bi-weekly build - such as "onnv_131".
For the builds which are fork points and which end up as the
base for an OpenSolaris release, we have not seen a need to
publish respin information. Further, I do not know what the
official policy is on this, and I will not guess.
As other commenters to this thread have mentioned, if you
want to get updates to an OpenSolaris release, then you must
have a paid support contract. These updates are on a separate
trunk from what you as in pkg.opensolaris.org/dev, and are
managed by the sustaining groups.
Finally, if you are interested in respins of the biweekly
builds, please subscribe to on-discuss, where you will see
information such as that described in my email from 2 November
2009
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/on-discuss/2009-November/001342.html, and
with an example archived at
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/on-discuss/2009-November/001353.html
James C. McPherson
--
Senior Software Engineer, Solaris
Oracle
http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
