Chris, The changes look good. One point though. The differences (example, of SUNWruby18r/prototype_com) is because of the entries being only slightly different. 0644 in the original and 644 in the new version. This causes a huge difference file. This could be avoided.
Siva Chris Zhu wrote: > Hi all, > > It's a review for CR6650926 again, as these are some conflict between > the change(enable rdoc), and the last ruby putback for dtrace probe, > we'd like to go through the process again. > The problem is shown as some rdoc files are missed for prototype_com of > SUNWruby18u, which are supposed to be generated automatically in building. > And it is caused by the dtrace probe integration, which has been put > back to the nv87(CR6632022). It add a new module "Tracer" to ruby which > will conflict with the default ruby script file tracer.rb which defined > "Tracer" as a top level class. So we should change the module name of > dtrace to avoid the problem. > > New changes are listed here > 1) We changed the module name from "Tracer" to "DTrace" to avoid the > conflict with build-in top-level class "Tracer". see > *ruby-dtrace-1.8.6.patch* > 2) Rdoc files for new module and methods of "DTrace" are add to package > SUNWruby18u. Because it's only for x86 now, so 2 entries are added to > *prototype_i386.tmpl > > *New webrev is updated here > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~chriszhu/CR6650926-webrev/ > > And here are the old review for CR6650926: > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=211095𳢗 > > > Thanks & regards > Chris > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > sfwnv-discuss mailing list > sfwnv-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sfwnv-discuss
