On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 11:34:42PM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: > Danek Duvall wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 05:01:19AM +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: > > > > > What do you mean with "respin" ? Were the B48 source tarballs be changed > > > or was the respin neccesary because something outside OS/Net needed to > > > be fixed ? > > > > There was an egregious bug found in ON at the last minute, > > Do you have any bugid for that ? > > > for which we > > needed to rebuild and redeliver to Release Engineering, causing them to > > delay their release of the Solaris WOS by a day. The source tarball seems > > to have captured the fix, but the changelog doesn't. I can't speak for the > > BFU archives or any of the other stuff. > > Could you do a quick check whether svn://svn.genunix.org/on/tags/b48/ is > identical to your internal B48 tree, please (I am asking because we'd > like to base the final source tree for first ksh93-integration putback > on B48 and right now I have no idea whether our basis is in sync with > Sun's tree or not...) ?
Take a recent Mercurial bundle, and update to the 'onnv_48' tag, and then apply the bundle at: http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/hg-build-snapshots/onnv_48.hg You will have exactly what was spun as build 48. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
