John Levon <john.levon at sun.com> writes: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 06:23:15PM -0400, Richard Lowe wrote: > >> > I explicitly (and separately) tested rtichk when I tested "wx pbchk." >> > It works, at least for the on-SWAN case. >> >> Right, the xVM guys use it. Part of the problem is that while it >> works in the ideal case, it a least used to be incredibly (and >> uselessly) noisy when things went wrong. I think John may have fixed >> that. > > Yep. > >> It also used to misreported errors in the off-SWAN case, such that it >> would tell me there was no RTI for my bugs, rather than that I >> couldn't reach webrti.sfbay > > My memory fails me if I fixed that too or not. Hopefully it's simple to > check :) > >> > And, of course, our modified rtichk is being used in production _now_. >> > It's deployed in Burlington. >> >> And by everyone(?) working on the Xen part of the xVM stuff, since >> that is in mercurial, in production, now. > > Yes, although as you know Rich, our bits are dreadfully old.
Right, but the last person to change those bits was you, and you changed them for xVM. I'd assume you were using the bits you fixed so you could use them :) -- Rich
