Switch SPARC GNU coreutils+bash from 32 to 64bit [PSARC/2008/351Self Review]

[Mark A. Carlson]

Guys, I thought we agreed that when the discussion thread gets this
long, we take it off the list and set some time aside at a meeting.

-- mark

Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> John Plocher wrote:
>   
>> Joseph Kowalski wrote:
>>     
>>> As other posts have suggested, we need to decide what the appropriate 
>>> group
>>> of utilities to do as subprojects is appropriate.
>>>       
>> I disagree that "we == PSARC" for that case.  Give guidance, yes, but
>> it is not PSARC's job to make the final decision.
>>     
>
> Agreed.  (I guess that parses as I'm agreeing with your disagreement
> with me.  Does that make me "disagreeable"?  Uh, don't answer that.)
>
> However, I'll also point out this isn't a community decision either.
>
> It is a distro decision.
>
>   
>>> My "Rome" is all versions of the same basic utilities: */bin/*awk, 
>>> */bin/*grep,... (well,
>>> maybe an exception for oawk).
>>>       
>> You have already asserted (in the CLIP case) that the GNU utilities are
>> in a different CLIP 'burb than the Sun/POSIX ones - you can't use CLIP to
>> justify both positions.
>>
>> Either they are the same "Rome", in which case they need to follow
>> the same CLI design pattern, or they aren't, in which case they
>> don't need to be treated the same 64-bit way.
>>     
>
> You are taking this *way* to literal.  The point is that there needs to
> be partitioning.  The axis of partitioning is open for discussion.
>
>   
>> It's a fasttrack.  Times out next Friday.  I won't be able to make next
>> week's Wed PSARC meeting.
>>     
>
> Thanks.
>
> - jek3
>
> _______________________________________________
> opensolaris-arc mailing list
> opensolaris-arc at opensolaris.org
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/attachments/20080530/a5a6feb0/attachment.html>