From sacadmin Thu May 21 09:05:08 2009 Received: from stard.sfbay.sun.com (stard.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.225.8]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4LG5814017648; Thu, 21 May 2009 09:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stard.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stard.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4LG53w6024923; Thu, 21 May 2009 09:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from richb@localhost) by stard.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4LG53fj024918; Thu, 21 May 2009 09:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 09:05:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Burridge Message-Id: <200905211605.n4LG53fj024918@stard.sfbay.sun.com> To: PSARC-record@sac.sfbay.sun.com Subject: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack] Status: RO Content-Length: 567 Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.68 02/23/09 SMI This information is Copyright 2009 Sun Microsystems 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: Update Perl to version 5.10.x 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: John Sonnenschein 1.3 Date of This Document: 21 May, 2009 4. Technical Description See the case directory for more detail 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: SFW 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From Rich.Burridge@sun.com Tue May 26 07:35:10 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QEZAWb013572 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QEZ9SY001390 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK90013V9UMPU00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900E7V9UL6T90@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QEZ9vB029046 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900J009PIDT00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.225.8] ([unknown] [129.146.225.8]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK900KC49ULPB80@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 07:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 07:34:59 -0700 From: Rich Burridge Subject: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] Sender: Rich.Burridge@sun.com To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: John Sonnenschein Message-id: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090323) Status: RO Content-Length: 8619 I'm sponsoring the following fast track for John Sonnenschein. The requested release binding is Minor. The fast track times out on 06/02/2009. ---- 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: PSARC/2009/315 Update Perl to version 5.10.x 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: John.Sonnenschein@Sun.COM 1.3. Date of This Document: 05/26/2009 1.3.1. Date this project was conceived: 05/21/2009 1.4. Name of Major Document Customer(s)/Consumer(s): 1.4.1. The PAC or CPT you expect to review your project: Solaris PAC 1.4.2. The ARC(s) you expect to review your project: PSARC 1.4.3. The Director/VP who is "Sponsoring" this project: Vincent.Murphy@Sun.COM 1.4.4. The name of your business unit: Software - OPG 1.5. Email Aliases: 1.5.1. Responsible Manager: Bonnie.Corwin@Sun.COM 1.5.2. Responsible Engineer: John.Sonnenschein@Sun.COM 1.5.3. Marketing Manager: N/A 1.5.4. Interest List: Rich.Burridge@Sun.COM 2. Project Summary 2.1. Project Description: Update the version of Perl shipped with Solaris to the latest available version. 2.2. Risks and Assumptions: This case is a direct follow-on from the following cases: PSARC/1999/192 Including Perl 5 with Solaris PSARC/2001/145 Update of Perl shipped with Solaris to version 5.6.1 PSARC/2003/661 Update Perl to version 5.8.x PSARC 2005/462 Removal of Perl 5.6.1 from Solaris 11 Perl 5.005_03 (introduced in Solaris 8 by PSARC/1999/192) was declared EOF in Solaris 9, and was removed earlier in the development of Solaris 10. Perl 5.6 was declared EOF in Solaris 10, and was removed from OpenSolaris. This fast-track intends to integrate the latest version of the Perl 5.10.x chain into OpenSolaris. Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be necessary to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later version. A separate case will be submitted for this. Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but will instead move to SFW. 3. Business Summary 3.1. Problem Area: Perl is a very commonly-used tool, and is used to deliver Solaris functionality (kstat(1M), projadd(1M), projdel(1m) etc.), it is used by the Apache we ship with Solaris and it is used by several unbundled tools (e.g. SunCluster) 3.2. Market/Requester: A complete cross-section of customers use Perl. 3.3. Business Justification: We need to keep OSS tools that we include in Solaris up-to-date in order to maintain credibility and avoid support costs for bugs in the older versions that are fixed by later versions 3.4. Competitive Analysis: Most other competing products either include Perl as standard or make it readily available. 3.5. Opportunity Window/Exposure: Need to have an up-to-date version of Perl in OpenSolaris 3.6. How will you know when you are done?: Perl test suite passes all tests, existing Solaris commands continue to work correctly with the new version. 4. Technical Description: 4.1. Details: The standard perl 5.10.x distribution will be obtained from the perl source archive (http://cpan.org/src), unnecessary components will be removed (e.g. support for other Operating Systems) and the source files will be integrated into SFW. If any bugs are encountered during the integration, these will be fixed and submitted for integration into the Perl repository, so that they will be hopefully automatically included in a future version. The fix will then be included in the perl SFW code via a patch, and the output of 'perl -V' modified to reflect the change. 4.2. Bug/RFE Number(s): RFE: #6841312 OSR ID# 11317 4.3. In Scope: See above. 4.4. Out of Scope: See above. 4.5. Interfaces: Following the interface stability section of the perl(1) manpage, here is the impact of this upgrade on the various Perl interfaces: Script interface (Uncommitted) --------------------------- There have been no major changes between 5.8.x and 5.10.x except backwards compatible extensions. Incompatible changes are as follows: * Packing and UTF-8 strings * Byte/character count feature in unpack() * The $* and $# variables have been removed * substr() lvalues are no longer fixed-length * Parsing of -f _ * :unique * Effect of pragmas in eval * chdir FOO * Handling of .pmc files * $^V is now a version object instead of a v-string * @- and @+ in patterns * $AUTOLOAD can now be tainted * Tainting and printf * undef and signal handlers * strictures and dereferencing in defined() * (?p{}) has been removed * Pseudo-hashes have been removed * Removal of the bytecode compiler and of perlcc * Removal of the JPL * Recursive inheritance detected earlier Full explanation of changes are included in perl5100delta.pod.txt (in the case materials directory) XSUB interface (Uncommitted) ------------------------- There have been no major changes since 5.8.x Binary interface (Uncommitted) --------------------------- Perl 5.10.x is not binary-compatible with 5.8.x. XS modules will require recompilation. Directory layout (Uncommitted) --------------------------- Unchanged from PSARC/2001/145. /usr/perl5/ bin -> [version]/bin man -> [version]/man pod -> [version]/pod [version]/ lib/ Perl modules. bin/ Perl binary, related tools. man/ Perl documentation in man form. pod/ Perl portable documentation. site-perl/ [version]/ User-installed modules. vendor-perl/ [version]/ SMI-provided unbundled modules. 4.6. Doc Impact: New perl documentation will be included, from that distributed with the source 4.7. Admin/Config Impact: No impact. 4.8. HA Impact: No impact. 4.9. I18N/L10N Impact: No impact. 4.10. Packaging & Delivery: SUNWperl510 will contain the entire distribution. 4.11. Security Impact: No impact. 4.12. Dependencies: This project has no external dependencies. 5. Reference Documents: PSARC/1999/192 Including Perl 5 with Solaris PSARC/2001/145 Update of Perl shipped with Solaris to version 5.6.1 PSARC/2003/661 Update Perl to version 5.8.x PSARC 2005/462 Removal of Perl 5.6.1 from Solaris 11 .../materials/perl5100delta.pod.txt - description of all changes from 5.8 -> 5.10 6. Resources and Schedule: 6.1. Projected Availability: Available for the OpenSolaris 2010.02 release. 6.2. Cost of Effort: 4 weeks. 6.3. Cost of Capital Resources: None. 6.4. Product Approval Committee requested information: 6.4.1. Consolidation or Component Name: SFW. 6.4.3. Type of CPT Review and Approval expected: FastTrack. 6.4.4. Project Boundary Conditions: None. 6.4.5. Is this a necessary project for OEM agreements: No. 6.4.6. Notes: None. 6.4.7. Target RTI Date/Release: July 2009. 6.4.8. Target Code Design Review Date: N/A - code is externally sourced. 6.4.9. Update approval addition: No. 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack. 6.6. ARC Exposure: Open. 7. Prototype Availability: 7.1. Prototype Availability: June 2009. 7.2. Prototype Cost: 2 weeks. From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue May 26 08:22:29 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QFMS4w012649 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:22:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QFMS4e028845 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:22:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900J01C1G3V00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:22:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900F2NC1FFK60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:22:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QFMPoY055115; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:22:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QFLN8e015327; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:21:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QFLNgt015324; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:21:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 11:21:23 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> To: Rich Burridge Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1100 Rich Burridge writes: > Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be > necessary > to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later > version. > A separate case will be submitted for this. Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x alongside 5.8.x.) > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but > will instead move to SFW. I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build time, but wasn't it delivered via ON because of some private interface dependencies? What's become of those for 5.10.x? (Or were they never really an issue?) -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Rich.Burridge@sun.com Tue May 26 08:59:27 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QFxRTj013803 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QFxQos017799 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900L0PDR30W00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900FYGDR2F790@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QFxQ96009907 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900600BTC1700@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.225.8] ([unknown] [129.146.225.8]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK900JNKDQVFO50@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 08:59:09 -0700 From: Rich Burridge Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Rich.Burridge@sun.com To: James Carlson Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <4A1C11CD.3080909@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090323) Status: RO Content-Length: 1096 James Carlson wrote: > Rich Burridge writes: > >> Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be >> necessary >> to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later >> version. >> A separate case will be submitted for this. >> > > Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the > removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? > (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense > here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x > alongside 5.8.x.) > It's the former. Would you like me to adjust "proposal.txt" accordingly, or does this mail log suffice? >> Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but >> will instead move to SFW. >> > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > time, but wasn't it delivered via ON because of some private interface > dependencies? What's become of those for 5.10.x? (Or were they never > really an issue?) > I'll let John answer this one. From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue May 26 09:25:13 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QGPDSW015003 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 09:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QGPCXX002130 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 09:25:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK90010FEY0LI00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:25:12 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900BA6EXZ22E0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:25:12 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QGPApC027085; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:25:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QGO8tX015648; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QGO8mT015645; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 12:24:08 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1C11CD.3080909@sun.com> To: Rich Burridge Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <18972.6056.342326.227235@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C11CD.3080909@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 717 Rich Burridge writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the > > removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? > > (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense > > here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x > > alongside 5.8.x.) > > > > It's the former. Would you like me to adjust "proposal.txt" > accordingly, or does this mail log suffice? Nope; that's enough. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From John.Sonnenschein@Sun.COM Tue May 26 09:45:56 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QGjtIU016150 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QGjpMo016470 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:45:55 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900M3FFWIR400@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900KAEFWG2R30@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QGjqSl009345 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900I00EXICL00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([unknown] [76.10.188.43]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK900LN2FWE0580@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 09:45:50 -0700 From: John Sonnenschein Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: John.Sonnenschein@Sun.COM To: James Carlson Cc: Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@Sun.COM Message-id: <7711B2A0-A4FA-4B94-9D5E-51853DEAC31B@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 546 On 26-May-09, at 8:21 AM, James Carlson wrote: > >> Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/ >> N, but >> will instead move to SFW. > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > time, but wasn't it delivered via ON because of some private interface > dependencies? What's become of those for 5.10.x? (Or were they never > really an issue?) I've double checked with Alan , there were at one point private headers used by the kstat module, but this is no longer the case -JohnS From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue May 26 09:53:51 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QGrnxa016333 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 09:53:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QGrZcV021674 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:53:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900011G9OSF00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:53:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900KARG8R2R50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 09:53:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QGrDLK043494; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:53:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QGqBPf015861; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:52:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QGqBpA015858; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:52:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 12:52:11 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <7711B2A0-A4FA-4B94-9D5E-51853DEAC31B@Sun.COM> To: John Sonnenschein Cc: Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18972.7739.643223.324471@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <7711B2A0-A4FA-4B94-9D5E-51853DEAC31B@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 830 John Sonnenschein writes: > > On 26-May-09, at 8:21 AM, James Carlson wrote: > > > >> Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/ > >> N, but > >> will instead move to SFW. > > > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > time, but wasn't it delivered via ON because of some private interface > > dependencies? What's become of those for 5.10.x? (Or were they never > > really an issue?) > > I've double checked with Alan , there were at one point private > headers used by the kstat module, but this is no longer the case OK; then +1. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gdamore@sun.com Tue May 26 10:16:49 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QHGnFl017412 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QHGefb007207 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 18:16:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900201HBZ4200@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900FSBHBYFKF0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QHGkSd022827 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900900DJP6800@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK9002BDHB7W730@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 10:16:19 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <18972.7739.643223.324471@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: James Carlson Cc: John Sonnenschein , Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4A1C23E3.2040406@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <7711B2A0-A4FA-4B94-9D5E-51853DEAC31B@Sun.COM> <18972.7739.643223.324471@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1168 James Carlson wrote: > John Sonnenschein writes: > >> On 26-May-09, at 8:21 AM, James Carlson wrote: >> >>>> Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/ >>>> N, but >>>> will instead move to SFW. >>>> >>> I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build >>> time, but wasn't it delivered via ON because of some private interface >>> dependencies? What's become of those for 5.10.x? (Or were they never >>> really an issue?) >>> >> I've double checked with Alan , there were at one point private >> headers used by the kstat module, but this is no longer the case >> > > OK; then +1. > > Not architectural in nature, but I wonder if Perl itself is "meaty" enough to justify delivering in its own consolidation. It takes a while to build. But then I have no insight into the release engineering issues associated having multiple consolidations, and I only work in the ON consolidation. Anything that shortens build times is a good thing, though. (Will moving to the SFW consolidation make it more trouble for people working in that consolidation, though?) - Garrett From iszczesniak@gmail.com Tue May 26 10:44:53 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QHiqtc017815 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QHiiNZ006606; Wed, 27 May 2009 01:44:46 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK90090FIMKU600@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK9008V7IMI2E50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QHfx43006567; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:44:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.11] [160.41.208.11]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3504621; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:44:41 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-41518223; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:44:41 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-bw0-f224.google.com ([209.85.218.224] [209.85.218.224]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-21415457; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:44:41 +0000 (Z) Received: by mail-bw0-f224.google.com with SMTP id 24so4392355bwz.8 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.68.10 with SMTP id t10mr8249812bki.182.1243359874067; Tue, 26 May 2009 10:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 19:44:34 +0200 From: "I. Szczesniak" Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: James Carlson Cc: Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QoUZzsgWFYx559Y0a+uYaqXQji+1eHdIayziBx79Q60=; b=BIPlxXL72nB+Jm4lmIKIZN2lGBln5cko3SUOLOEfBvKdsztuDgVlGf/m7k4JQwrPbI dGOMEufGtDF3LJI7k9pDhl6xAin1HoUaIY4RL0YzVm12jmHpinTH6KNdODVG7JxrfuZv k6O0Tknqi1MSn15dKxwibXBWMVxeJ5P8n25Dw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=atjQIG8c2IqsxlKcrDU+65RWND804E76A/aOg4Fyp+uT/qflnGOcVPNrox+/BWMM7L YoMAMBFcDYgzwGdmsvh8pOa3kNkpUD1+fz31nLkDvrXh/QZ69UhEJ9Qb9z2+npjaCNcz 3ZHKPm1b2zCWD/ZEoDmSdxNC76Bdhc0jAd5+c= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.057sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 1216 On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: > Rich Burridge writes: > > Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be > > necessary > > to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later > > version. > > A separate case will be submitted for this. > > Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the > removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? > (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense > here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x > alongside 5.8.x.) > > > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but > > will instead move to SFW. > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > time, Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. If there is no other justification build time please keep perl in ONNV. Or derail this case and write memo why perl should move to SFW. Irek From gdamore@sun.com Tue May 26 11:00:11 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QI0Am8018573 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QHxsZV006751 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 19:00:10 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK90040FJC8FZ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK9002FWJC7RP10@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QI07Fv029683 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900600IJV9400@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.11] ([unknown] [76.93.15.33]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK900MGIJC46H30@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:04 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: James Carlson , Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4A1C2E24.2010001@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081201) Status: RO Content-Length: 1420 I. Szczesniak wrote: > On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: > >> Rich Burridge writes: >> > Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be >> > necessary >> > to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later >> > version. >> > A separate case will be submitted for this. >> >> Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the >> removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? >> (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense >> here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x >> alongside 5.8.x.) >> >> > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but >> > will instead move to SFW. >> >> I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build >> time, >> > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > Can you cite any evidence of this? I think a lot of excellent software is delivered via SFW. > If there is no other justification build time please keep perl in > ONNV. Or derail this case and write memo why perl should move to SFW. > > Irek > I disagree. -- Garrett From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue May 26 11:00:43 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QI0fI9018588 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QI0XqS015945 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:00:40 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900C0RJD4SK00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-02.east.sun.com ([129.148.13.5]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK90088BJD32EF0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-02.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QI0XsJ007877; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:00:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QHxVqO016167; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:59:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QHxVpg016164; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:59:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 13:59:31 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18972.11779.422939.81423@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 2140 I. Szczesniak writes: > On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > time, > > Is this the only justification? It's the only difference, so, yes. > Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. That doesn't make any sense to me, and I object to having aspersions cast on the supported open source code that delivers through SFW. With either consolidation, the Perl code that's present is essentially just what comes from the open source, as it is with _many_ projects that happen to deliver through ON -- including, incidentally, ksh93, where we're not doing extensive code or design reviews up to the normal ON standards, because they'd just be infeasible. The big difference between the two is in makefiles: you use your own in SFW, but you generally must use ON's in ON. That difference is why I argued (more than once) for delivering ksh93 through SFW. It'd be simpler and lower overhead, and there's no necessary entanglement with the rest of the core OS. > If there is no other justification build time please keep perl in > ONNV. Or derail this case and write memo why perl should move to SFW. Sorry, I disagree. Perhaps you're thinking of the old Freeware (/opt/sfw) system, where it really was the wild west, and compiling was enough. That has nothing to do with the SFW consolidation, which delivers all sorts of things into /usr/bin. If moving Perl to SFW somehow lowers quality, then there's a *MUCH* bigger problem afoot than just Perl, and derailing this case to write a memo will not fix it. If that were somehow true (and I'm fairly certain it's not), then some systemic defect in SFW itself would need to be addressed. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From James.Walker@sun.com Tue May 26 11:02:35 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QI2ZLi018687 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QI2XSs047493 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 12:02:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900B25JGADX00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:02:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK9005VAJG786A0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:02:31 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QI2VMo011873 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 18:02:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900L00JF07R00@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:02:31 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [172.20.25.153] ([unknown] [172.20.25.153]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK900J25JG2LWE0@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:02:27 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 12:14:29 -0600 From: Jim Walker Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1C23E3.2040406@sun.com> Sender: James.Walker@sun.com To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Rich Burridge Reply-to: James.Walker@sun.com Message-id: <4A1C3185.8000508@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <7711B2A0-A4FA-4B94-9D5E-51853DEAC31B@Sun.COM> <18972.7739.643223.324471@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C23E3.2040406@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080728) Status: RO Content-Length: 1015 Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > Not architectural in nature, but I wonder if Perl itself is "meaty" > enough to justify delivering in its own consolidation. It takes a while > to build. But then I have no insight into the release engineering > issues associated having multiple consolidations, and I only work in the > ON consolidation. Anything that shortens build times is a good thing, > though. (Will moving to the SFW consolidation make it more trouble for > people working in that consolidation, though?) > Maybe, but consolidations should have dedicated resources including a tech lead, gatekeeper and PM and cteam members to review changes and integrations and make sure quality standards are met. SFW does all this. I don't recommend one or two person consolidations. If you don't have the staffing to maintain your own consolidation, established ones should be used. Plus, the SFW team is working toward more scalable builds, so developers don't have to build every pkg to integrate. Cheers, Jim From James.Walker@sun.com Tue May 26 11:09:46 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QI9j9s019006 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 11:09:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QI9Xw9020383 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:09:44 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900E0LJS5AU00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900CXWJS4TK50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 11:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QI9eFE018162 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 18:09:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KK900L00JF07R00@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:09:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [172.20.25.153] ([unknown] [172.20.25.153]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KK9007MKJS3X480@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 12:09:39 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 12:21:42 -0600 From: Jim Walker Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: James.Walker@sun.com To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Reply-to: James.Walker@sun.com Message-id: <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080728) Status: RO Content-Length: 674 I. Szczesniak wrote: >> >> > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but >> > will instead move to SFW. >> >> I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build >> time, > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. Also, there are many critical system components in SFW already, like gcc, mercurial, zip, rsync, php, p7zip ... Cheers, Jim From iszczesniak@gmail.com Tue May 26 13:43:37 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QKhZue022558 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QKh6L7029358; Tue, 26 May 2009 21:43:31 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900D01QWGKP00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK90023QQWGRKE0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QKhR1r029642; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:43:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp12es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.12] [160.41.208.12]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-901614; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:43:27 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp12es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-100285909; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:43:27 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-bw0-f224.google.com ([209.85.218.224] [209.85.218.224]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-21855890; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:43:27 +0000 (Z) Received: by bwz24 with SMTP id 24so4527774bwz.8 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.118.70 with SMTP id u6mr8494129bkq.198.1243370596821; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 22:43:16 +0200 From: "I. Szczesniak" Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1C2E24.2010001@sun.com> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: James Carlson , Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Roland Mainz Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=s69pcMp/mHDQZCaHdutXlx5JEh6Q49rjoEZKyy9g0TU=; b=Rxm701gXCcord7uQW7GDnPd3UVAfEGFu+KyzgHJ+pFzmAbtjSYK8IAnirl3lr0klpz woYurVTf9dJpu97aA41Pim0xKzh0TIoLQYJz0o3wBkxBQ9wDX8lpbWJ1iGDGcAKyH7e+ wsU8xPkPF9wA6N9K8QPr3ycNO3h7D1SZwEQS4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Xiq2yMmzO6OT0S6TS9LsfjcEPcWqvfVEykrdUr/Ka47cuBWvavFcl7qdbJTpZ4UFnW fIGFLpedfbDrF2T8C83m5/r5zcYuY9urN1zQ40lmJUo8vBX4r/KsUj793h3xcz2zH1oM F6fKiltO/1LHYgvYeIG3tYpaNlfWV68vM9GJU= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=-0.7/5.0, scanned in 0.079sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C2E24.2010001@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 2679 On 5/26/09, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > > On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: > > > > > > > Rich Burridge writes: > > > > Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be > > > > necessary > > > > to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later > > > > version. > > > > A separate case will be submitted for this. > > > > > > Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the > > > removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? > > > (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense > > > here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x > > > alongside 5.8.x.) > > > > > > > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to > O/N, but > > > > will instead move to SFW. > > > > > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > > time, > > > > > > > > > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > > > > > > Can you cite any evidence of this? I think a lot of excellent software is > delivered via SFW. Excellent software which is poorly integrated into Solaris. Evidence 1: Configurations changes in random intervals, i.e. postgresql using select() instead of poll() and MAP_ANON depending on system load of the build machine. postgresql tcl is broken in some SXDE/SXCE releases because it picks the wrong libraries randomly, too. Evidence 2: Software in SFW uses suboptimal compiler flags. Software delivered via SFW uses only SFW default flags or the flags discovered by autoconf. Some bits are even delivered without the optimizer enabled. Roland Mainz said he'll take a look but never responded to that subject. Evidence 3: API stability. Shall we discuss the random disappearance and appearance of features here? Its rarely noticed that adding software to the build machines silently enables new or changes existing features in the SFW software. perl 5.8 in ONNV was added by someone who knew the shortcomings of perl's automated configuration and wrote his own Makfiles to avoid them. Putting perl into SFW will those shortcomings appear again in the system perl installation. > > If there is no other justification build time please keep perl in > > ONNV. Or derail this case and write memo why perl should move to SFW. > > > > Irek > > > > > I disagree. What is your justification? Irek From iszczesniak@gmail.com Tue May 26 13:48:21 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QKmKGi022576 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:48:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QKmDVY003058; Tue, 26 May 2009 21:48:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK90040VR4FRR00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:48:15 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900EIVR4DHB80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:48:14 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (ip121.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.121]) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4QKcCng024357; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:48:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.11] [160.41.208.11]) by relay11i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3521642; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:48:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-41934204; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:48:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-ew0-f157.google.com ([209.85.219.157] [209.85.219.157]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-21866727; Tue, 26 May 2009 20:48:13 +0000 (Z) Received: by ewy1 with SMTP id 1so4395076ewy.8 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.42.13 with SMTP id p13mr732246ebp.48.1243370824291; Tue, 26 May 2009 13:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 22:47:04 +0200 From: "I. Szczesniak" Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> To: James.Walker@sun.com Cc: John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0qZckyIF2WypUGcl//tLkFGB/6b1DUyNtrttZRvSJz4=; b=t9tfcaqL7kGBP5NYKFy2WUr9N0g2psw5KTOr2Q8nYAHpaTu1HtGfV4fkw+CnkMnzgI ymXx3jYWCHZl/k/yeRpoWkzY/3tnTE/M5jnrDdDKDE62jN/j3jnSeNp2QksnVf1IZ4Wm +To74YNzlgXpuvLxcCrOOv7HcU72A+MGM61R8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ktLQMM3T9a8Tz4n4i825xDUsSHDzd0QXnJtia9mUYDyEDl1PmrMIFf27mAJQ+tTewD KKrLLmnYs5Lvlhti43+6UH0kJxQi1AEI1+wRDYVzPmenY31jh1dJO0OBEGfk6+YdwOVL 4cMWYAXV2cYTrVFrjxbgyi3A0Cct3SYpPRH24= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.051sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 741 On 5/26/09, Jim Walker wrote: > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to > O/N, but > > > > will instead move to SFW. > > > > > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > > time, > > > > > > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > > > > I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. I disagree. The software is high quality but the integration in SFW is very poor. Irek From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Tue May 26 14:30:50 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QLUnAm023653 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QLUmuR001044 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Tue, 26 May 2009 22:30:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900301T3BNT00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 14:30:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-02.east.sun.com ([129.148.13.5]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900DQWT37PO40@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 26 May 2009 14:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-02.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QLUfph056065; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:30:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QLTdbr016883; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:29:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QLTdYT016880; Tue, 26 May 2009 17:29:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 17:29:39 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18972.24387.687281.382730@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1707 I. Szczesniak writes: > On 5/26/09, Jim Walker wrote: > > I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. > > I disagree. The software is high quality but the integration in SFW is > very poor. This is an ARC review. Can you point out what the _architectural_ issue is that you're trying to discuss here? Is SFW somehow architecturally inferior? If so, then I'm not sure that's this project's problem to solve or that the proposed solution (forcing yet another giant unmodified and scantily-reviewed open source wad into ON) is necessarily better. Perhaps we need to have a separate project to fix these issues ... whatever they may be. Is the use in SFW of "./configure" and autoconf-like things the badness? If so, then let's discuss that specific issue. Perhaps there's some less-dynamic way that could be suggested. Or is it just that this is open source from outside of Sun and thus hasn't been through Sun's normal development process? If so, then get with the project team and help them improve the quality of the code. That doesn't have any bearing on the selected consolidation. (In fact, it's almost certainly guaranteed to be simpler to achieve outside of ON, where you're going to be forced into doing things that diverge from the upstream sources.) I think you're imagining a level of goodness in ON that doesn't necessarily exist, particularly for things that are kept actively in sync with external (upstream) sources. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Tue May 26 14:43:00 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4QLgxSE023990 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4QLgtmD019130; Tue, 26 May 2009 14:42:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KK900A2HTNKG600@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:42:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM ([129.153.128.104]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KK900EISTNJGWB0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 15:42:55 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4QLPZbS011977; Tue, 26 May 2009 16:25:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4QLPZXp011976; Tue, 26 May 2009 16:25:35 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 16:25:35 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: "Garrett D'Amore" , James Carlson , Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Roland Mainz Message-id: <20090526212534.GN29258@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C2E24.2010001@sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 2633 On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:43:16PM +0200, I. Szczesniak wrote: > On 5/26/09, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > > > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > > > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > > > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > > > > Can you cite any evidence of this? I think a lot of excellent software is > > delivered via SFW. > > Excellent software which is poorly integrated into Solaris. > > Evidence 1: Configurations changes in random intervals, i.e. > postgresql using select() instead of poll() and MAP_ANON depending on > system load of the build machine. postgresql tcl is broken in some > SXDE/SXCE releases because it picks the wrong libraries randomly, too. PostgreSQL was never in ON. Delivery through SFW did not result in a downgrade. What you describe sounds like a bug, and it's not remotely clear how the choice of consolidation could have led to it. > Evidence 2: Software in SFW uses suboptimal compiler flags. Software > delivered via SFW uses only SFW default flags or the flags discovered > by autoconf. Some bits are even delivered without the optimizer > enabled. > Roland Mainz said he'll take a look but never responded to that subject. This too would be a bug. > Evidence 3: API stability. Shall we discuss the random disappearance > and appearance of features here? Its rarely noticed that adding > software to the build machines silently enables new or changes > existing features in the SFW software. The SFW consolidation, like the ON consolidation, adheres to the same ARC best practices with respect to interface stability taxonomy and release bindings. > perl 5.8 in ONNV was added by someone who knew the shortcomings of > perl's automated configuration and wrote his own Makfiles to avoid > them. Putting perl into SFW will those shortcomings appear again in > the system perl installation. I doubt that. I suspect you're speculating here. I would speculate that Perl was integrated into ON earlier because it was the consolidation that the engineer who did the integration was most familiar with, or because the Perl integration into ON pre-dates the SFW consolidation. Having put FOSS into both consolidations I can assure you that the process of adapting the build process of a FOSS item to the ON build structure is complicated, error prone, and requires more maintenance; whereas the process of adapting the build process of a FOSS item to the SFW build is straightforward. Nico -- From Milan.Jurik@sun.com Tue May 26 18:57:07 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4R1v73q025572 for ; Tue, 26 May 2009 18:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4R1v7K3021896 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 26 May 2009 18:57:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKA00E055F7RN00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 19:57:07 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKA00IP35F6E990@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 26 May 2009 19:57:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4R1v5Qt029861 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 01:57:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKA00G005841O00@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:57:05 +0100 (BST) Received: from [10.1.241.27] ([unknown] [208.253.138.162]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKA006DX5F4GH40@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:57:05 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 03:56:49 +0200 From: Milan Jurik Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: Milan.Jurik@sun.com To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <1243389419.1952.37.camel@xylabone> Organization: Sun Microsystems Czech MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C2E24.2010001@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 2791 Hi Irek, I. Szczesniak píše v út 26. 05. 2009 v 22:43 +0200: [...] > > Can you cite any evidence of this? I think a lot of excellent software is > > delivered via SFW. > > Excellent software which is poorly integrated into Solaris. > I agree that some parts of SFW are not well maintained. And yes, sometimes it is problem of SFW consolidation design but it is improving just these days. But it is not situation of this Perl ARC case. > Evidence 1: Configurations changes in random intervals, i.e. > postgresql using select() instead of poll() and MAP_ANON depending on > system load of the build machine. postgresql tcl is broken in some > SXDE/SXCE releases because it picks the wrong libraries randomly, too. > There are two different issues, not optimal integration (can you send me CR numbers for select/poll and MAP_ANON RFEs, privately, please?) and Postgres build process in SFW (on-going improvements there). > Evidence 2: Software in SFW uses suboptimal compiler flags. Software > delivered via SFW uses only SFW default flags or the flags discovered > by autoconf. Some bits are even delivered without the optimizer > enabled. These are not problems of SFW, these are problems of that software. Fill RFEs. It will not be automagically solve by moving it to different consolidation. > Roland Mainz said he'll take a look but never responded to that subject. > Who will disturb Roland from ksh93 project he will be "disturbed" by me ;-) > Evidence 3: API stability. Shall we discuss the random disappearance > and appearance of features here? Its rarely noticed that adding > software to the build machines silently enables new or changes > existing features in the SFW software. > But this would not be solved by different consolidation. Also, I went through the integration process of new library to SFW few weeks ago and C-team is doing very good job during the process to avoid such situations. Mistakes can happen, of course. If some documented feature disappear without proper ARC process, then it is bug. As Nico wrote, SFW has the same ARC process as ON. If some new feature appear withour ARC, then it is private feature. And you can fill RFE/bug, of course. > perl 5.8 in ONNV was added by someone who knew the shortcomings of > perl's automated configuration and wrote his own Makfiles to avoid > them. Putting perl into SFW will those shortcomings appear again in > the system perl installation. > That is responsibility of Perl maintainer. He can wrote his own Makefiles even in SFW. He can fix perl's automated configuration shortcomings. But again, it is not SFW consolidation problem. By your logic even Sun Studio should be part of ON gate. I think there is no real ARC issue, only possibility of buggy integration. Best regards, Milan From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed May 27 02:12:25 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4R9COn1027073 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:12:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4R9CJuf039612 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 03:12:24 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKA00F2JPKOSG00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:12:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKA00FN4PKM6G00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-10.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4R9CMp6008186 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:12:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-10.sun.com by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKA00100NJZCA00@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:12:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.199] ([unknown] [129.156.173.199]) by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKA005HOPKH8A80@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:12:17 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 10:12:17 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4A1D03F1.2090407@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20090127) Status: RO Content-Length: 1083 This discussion is not really architectural in nature. Best I can recall the only reason that the consolidation is relevant to ARC review at all is to determine wither ARC contracts are required for use of Consolidation Private interfaces or not [ which in the case of Perl used to be the case but is no longer ]. Given that a large majority of the software in SFW is actually build using effectively './configure && make' I would say that a large number of build related bugs are more likely to be poor detection of OpenSolaris features or possible optimisations in those upstream configure scripts. This is certainly the case for all issues I've ever found. That is not to say that the way that SFW drives the ./configure (mostly by the the environment it sets up) isn't able to be improved. However none of that is really stuff that concerns ARC, it is however very much of interest for codereview and SFW C-Team review. As such I strongly suggest that continued discussion of this very valuable topic move to sfwnv-discuss@opensolaris.org. -- Darren J Moffat From Darren.Reed@sun.com Wed May 27 02:22:46 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4R9MiC4027133 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4R9Mgu9021599 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:22:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKA00H53Q1VFP00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:22:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com ([192.18.6.24]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKA00FGOQ1Q6G20@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:22:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4R9Mc1p013411 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:22:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKA00H00N7JLE00@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:22:38 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.157.18.122] ([unknown] [129.157.18.122]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKA00GGRQ1FPTE0@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:22:27 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:22:24 +0200 From: Darren Reed Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> Sender: Darren.Reed@sun.com To: Rich Burridge Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) Status: RO Content-Length: 827 Rich Burridge wrote: > ... > 3. Business Summary > > 3.1. Problem Area: > > Perl is a very commonly-used tool, and is used to deliver Solaris > functionality (kstat(1M), projadd(1M), projdel(1m) etc.), it is > used by > the Apache we ship with Solaris and it is used by several > unbundled > tools (e.g. SunCluster) In other words, after this project integrates, parts of an install of ON will not work without parts of SFW also being installed. Is a circular dependency like that desired? Is it acceptable for someone to to a build and install of only ON and have documented programs that do not function because the interpreter is missing? Is that impossible or just something we don't care about? To me it seems like perl is a core part of the system and thus should be in ON... Darren From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed May 27 02:35:58 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4R9ZwYS027242 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4R9ZwGr002842 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 02:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKA00J0HQNXH900@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com ([192.18.6.24]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKA00F92QNU6B30@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:35:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-10.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4R9ZsNW015932 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:35:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-10.sun.com by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKA00G00P9A2F00@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.199] ([unknown] [129.156.173.199]) by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKA0058QQNT8AA0@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:53 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:53 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Darren Reed Cc: Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20090127) Status: RO Content-Length: 1644 Darren Reed wrote: > Rich Burridge wrote: >> ... >> 3. Business Summary >> >> 3.1. Problem Area: >> >> Perl is a very commonly-used tool, and is used to deliver Solaris >> functionality (kstat(1M), projadd(1M), projdel(1m) etc.), it is >> used by >> the Apache we ship with Solaris and it is used by several >> unbundled >> tools (e.g. SunCluster) > > In other words, after this project integrates, parts of an install of ON > will > not work without parts of SFW also being installed. Is a circular > dependency > like that desired? It already exists and has done so for years. A consolidation is not the install boundary. Install boundaries are collections of packages which may come from multiple consolidations. > Is it acceptable for someone to to a build and install of only ON and have > documented programs that do not function because the interpreter is > missing? > Is that impossible or just something we don't care about? It isn't possible nor is it actually expected. > To me it seems like perl is a core part of the system and thus should be > in ON... So are other things already in SFW. Such as libxml2 (needed by SMF), Python (needed by the new pkg system). The legacy package tools come from a different consolidation as do other critical packages such as SUNWtls. At a rough count I found at least 4 consolidations involved in the SUNWCmreq install cluster - which is the one smaller than the SUNWCrnet that is visible during interactive installed. SUNWCmreq is the bare minimum that the legacy Nevada and Solaris 10 installers will let you install. -- Darren J Moffat From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Wed May 27 08:32:02 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RFW2l1028738 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RFVvIY060220; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:31:58 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00C0V759PR00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:31:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM ([129.153.128.104]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00F72758ZXD0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4RFTZl7014058; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:29:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4RFTZM2014057; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:29:35 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 10:29:35 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> To: Darren J Moffat Cc: Darren Reed , Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <20090527152935.GS29258@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> X-Authentication-warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 1031 On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:35:53AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Darren Reed wrote: > >Is it acceptable for someone to to a build and install of only ON and > >have documented programs that do not function because the interpreter > >is missing? Is that impossible or just something we don't care > >about? > > It isn't possible nor is it actually expected. I think Darren meant: build ON then BFU a proper install of Solaris to that build of ON. BFU allows that, of course, though BFU is not a supported method of installation. There should probably be an update_perl script in the ONNV gate public bin, to support BFU users (even though BFU is unsupported). Eventually BFU should be replaced by IPS (update pkgs from a private repo with just your bits). > >To me it seems like perl is a core part of the system and thus should be > >in ON... > > So are other things already in SFW. Let's not forget OpenSSL, which is now in SFW, and which parts of ON depend on. This ship has sailed. And it's a good thing. Nico -- From Mark.Phalan@sun.com Wed May 27 08:46:01 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RFk0bG028902 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 08:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RFjw0P004705 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:46:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB0071N7SNRR00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:45:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com ([192.18.6.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB000437SN5V70@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:45:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-emea-10.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RFjwju015371 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 15:45:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-10.sun.com by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKB000006AW5Q00@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 16:45:58 +0100 (BST) Received: from [10.18.138.124] ([unknown] [10.18.138.124]) by fe-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKB00E1L7SKGW10@fe-emea-10.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 16:45:57 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:45:47 +0200 From: Mark Phalan Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <20090527152935.GS29258@Sun.COM> Sender: Mark.Phalan@sun.com To: Nicolas Williams Cc: Darren J Moffat , Darren Reed , Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com, John Sonnenschein Message-id: <1243439147.2101.5746.camel@zup> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.2 Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> <20090527152935.GS29258@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 1148 On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 10:29 -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:35:53AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote: > > Darren Reed wrote: > > >Is it acceptable for someone to to a build and install of only ON and > > >have documented programs that do not function because the interpreter > > >is missing? Is that impossible or just something we don't care > > >about? > > > > It isn't possible nor is it actually expected. > > I think Darren meant: build ON then BFU a proper install of Solaris to > that build of ON. BFU allows that, of course, though BFU is not a > supported method of installation. There should probably be an > update_perl script in the ONNV gate public bin, to support BFU users > (even though BFU is unsupported). Eventually BFU should be replaced by > IPS (update pkgs from a private repo with just your bits). > > > >To me it seems like perl is a core part of the system and thus should be > > >in ON... > > > > So are other things already in SFW. > > Let's not forget OpenSSL, which is now in SFW, and which parts of ON > depend on. FYI: It isn't there yet but should be by the end of the week. -M From olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com Wed May 27 09:15:49 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGFmCp000715 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:15:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGFf2I008249; Wed, 27 May 2009 17:15:45 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00G0H9677G00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00ARU9664C90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RFV0ld002589; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:15:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.mms.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.230] [160.41.221.230]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4859170; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:15:42 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay45i.sun.com (relay45i.sun.com [192.5.209.94]) by mms48es.mms.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3530487; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:15:41 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-bw0-f176.google.com ([209.85.218.176] [209.85.218.176]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3960790; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:15:31 +0000 (Z) Received: by mail-bw0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 24so5257369bwz.8 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.119.198 with SMTP id a6mr215257far.42.1243440876316; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 18:14:36 +0200 From: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> To: James.Walker@sun.com Cc: "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ToS1plA9BZfyEs+OkF0QWXw/mssWn7UBgtXmg0J/GBA=; b=TEcUJBYm5tAZs8hrpbNqzMj56rY1VY+PZxPjX8Ec+aOJRww/8jvKw8ELF1cRAM1wjB rNBNhy0QUY6J110146hnsg5QRUafUTi9+X0/c7S8zda70TEywcRsIxmppcK5//cUQzMg Mh0wMX2JI5QbrR29oR4mmQTGspdszKbm1o2O4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vyitTTVJ6xEK9C7F4tYn95UwnXo8AsuQI3bXV8HYnA5eERspqeTyc+M4PyPCDiA8eP KlHdXVI+1/kqqeZAg39iqTL6qKwjygcoaJ+cBXaaiK+Awwrff+9dfrV3GMitT+RuGCQT SPsiJ1JHR9GDTy67x0Bq2KgbO8icuBMHHiGJE= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.059sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1207 On 5/26/09, Jim Walker wrote: > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to > O/N, but > > > > will instead move to SFW. > > > > > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > > time, > > > > > > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > > > > I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples of neglect. -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer \ |-..-'` /\/\ /\/\ `--` `--` From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed May 27 09:23:24 2009 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGNM7r001046 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGNKk0009706 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 28 May 2009 00:23:21 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00G0F9IXLY00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00ABH9IW4EB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RGNJAH020172 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:23:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKB00J009F0Z400@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 17:23:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.199] ([unknown] [129.156.173.199]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKB001PW9IUUM40@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 27 May 2009 17:23:19 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:23:18 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: =?UTF-8?B?0L7Qu9GM0LPQsCDQutGA0YvQttCw0L3QvtCy0YHQutCw0Y8=?= Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4A1D68F6.3020700@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20090127) Status: RO Content-Length: 1462 ольга крыжановская wrote: > On 5/26/09, Jim Walker wrote: >> I. Szczesniak wrote: >> >>>> > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to >> O/N, but >>>> > will instead move to SFW. >>>> >>>> I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build >>>> time, >>>> >>> Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have >>> substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that >>> putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect >>> the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. >>> >> I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. > > I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people > invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then > no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples > of neglect. As someone who's team contributes to both ON and SFW I very much object to that allegation we apply the same quality to all our work regardless of what consolidation it goes in to. We choose the consolidation we deliver to carefully based on the requirements of the component we are working on. This alias is not an appropriate place for further discussion of this topic though as it is not related to the Perl case (the quality of the upstream Perl won't magically change) nor is it actually architectural in nature. -- Darren J Moffat From olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com Wed May 27 09:24:37 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGOZ6M001129 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:24:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGOSc2036215; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:24:32 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00L279KV6U00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:24:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00E5O9KUW8D0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:24:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RFgHxE002602; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:24:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp41es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.10] [160.41.221.10]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4860203; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:24:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay41i.sun.com (relay41i.sun.com [192.5.209.70]) by mmp41es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-33118073; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:24:27 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-bw0-f176.google.com ([209.85.218.176] [209.85.218.176]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2817825; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:22:14 +0000 (Z) Received: by mail-bw0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 24so5264466bwz.8 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.122.15 with SMTP id j15mr254015far.10.1243441277223; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 18:21:16 +0200 From: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> To: Darren J Moffat Cc: Darren Reed , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Rich Burridge Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8VIhzGf0dXSZ7HFjtgq7IkW5xgNH/u9Tk8gbG7p6ge8=; b=HxOpVzRH8TxZAcqn1O6nXUYVIBZpdmuU8dlrBZBg3Sh58zYFq1mo/LLpYBRDvm2Rxh uwGBioLAvbyeYF08oe+mqlFYJqpweZaEEBTluSUTHmBBoIT4nnCTqn91ozk0yB/LRmzG PtwE+iujyveo12NeFLgvEPL60qqoQeo7Y/eLQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rEHuAc+hFRsUC7wq97rQiXbKiXFl4Ug8v6Pzy5Lq4csZ/yEuh/g50QACp5Qyuj+DtY FJ93lCvcjtqccI1ULedeFKfz7C650moWEKHasKSVio/AmAQwcC1Rmb+0lninF4kEn7Hy 1AayWPlYqHX4zJtMXCQTsW7TAKJYbHUIOpKhs= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=-0.7/5.0, scanned in 0.274sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <4A1D0650.1070204@Sun.COM> <4A1D0979.2070209@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 2016 On 5/27/09, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Darren Reed wrote: > > > Rich Burridge wrote: > > > > > ... > > > 3. Business Summary > > > > > > 3.1. Problem Area: > > > > > > Perl is a very commonly-used tool, and is used to deliver Solaris > > > functionality (kstat(1M), projadd(1M), projdel(1m) etc.), it is > used by > > > the Apache we ship with Solaris and it is used by several > unbundled > > > tools (e.g. SunCluster) > > > > > > > In other words, after this project integrates, parts of an install of ON > will > > not work without parts of SFW also being installed. Is a circular > dependency > > like that desired? > > > > It already exists and has done so for years. > > A consolidation is not the install boundary. Install boundaries are > collections of packages which may come from multiple consolidations. > > > > Is it acceptable for someone to to a build and install of only ON and have > > documented programs that do not function because the interpreter is > missing? > > Is that impossible or just something we don't care about? > > > > It isn't possible nor is it actually expected. > > > > To me it seems like perl is a core part of the system and thus should be > > in ON... > > > > So are other things already in SFW. > > Such as libxml2 (needed by SMF), Python (needed by the new pkg system). The python integration in SFW is a prime example why critical system components should NOT be using /usr/bin/python. The version in SFW is old, slow and buggy and since Feb 2008 no one has cared to correct this issue or even apply patches for critical security bugs which are commonly used in Fedora and Ubuntu Linux. -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer \ |-..-'` /\/\ /\/\ `--` `--` From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed May 27 09:26:04 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGQ4Lm001150 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGQ3dD037262 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:26:04 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00B0H9NFHY00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:26:03 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB000AJ9ND5HB0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 10:26:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGPxjk038802; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4RGOvsa020201; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:24:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4RGOv5w020196; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:24:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:24:57 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18973.26969.248191.246547@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-5 X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id n4RGQ4Lm001150 Status: RO Content-Length: 807 writes: > I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people > invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then > no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples > of neglect. Feel free to volunteer some help to clean up whatever it is you think is "trashy," but your argument holds no architectural water. There's no reason whatever to believe that the same unmodified source code will be magically worse if built inside SFW than if it were built in ON, or better simply because it's moved to ON. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com Wed May 27 09:35:25 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGZOVF001261 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGZL6t044466; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00C05A2WDX00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:20 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB000U7A2U5XA0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:35:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RGU9YC007560; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:35:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.11] [160.41.208.11]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3599456; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:35:18 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp11es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-44122374; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:35:18 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-fx0-f165.google.com ([209.85.220.165] [209.85.220.165]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-24205780; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:35:18 +0000 (Z) Received: by mail-fx0-f165.google.com with SMTP id 9so5320258fxm.8 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.111.134 with SMTP id s6mr241409fap.37.1243442108473; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 18:35:08 +0200 From: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1D68F6.3020700@Sun.COM> To: Darren J Moffat Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=18F1FvJJkTUnt/HbyTDrHnsvRgg2U7gZdTq/f8UTKBk=; b=JQbPxx2TlSKhoLxwFtd63OYDJfzw9qnaEja0suoKFxndzm1UoB7J3MWMj8cqk9fgQd MKnhpMstUoxSVPje4440RHwUCNCWV7fIlydMPPiV0vrnq0MUuCTrroGm7cwUFdHsuD2b 4PuIvjgSUIZJlza+6p3/xJxxKTq53rMsGXosc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AkA8AzqJ0BuHpAM6eGCNXGOn3KDDTgaUKXZaTkdSYQFToGwL45x9kmS5flEu+i3eNN 1cFFbWb/Qy3EmWRIVsD2yooac4QGF2sOpskQm1XuGooTk8nSJv03ji1DPBuuuh9xYXo1 UV3ON760YcmyhF6K7aa9rSaR0v9ZwzJ7mXjgY= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Antispam: No, score=-0.2/5.0, scanned in 0.079sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> <4A1D68F6.3020700@Sun.COM> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id n4RGZOVF001261 Status: RO Content-Length: 2609 On 5/27/09, Darren J Moffat wrote: > wrote: > > > On 5/26/09, Jim Walker wrote: > > > > > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to > > > > > > > > > > > > O/N, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > will instead move to SFW. > > > > > > > > > > I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build > > > > > time, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > > > > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > > > > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > > > > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > > > > > > > > > > > I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. > > > > > > > I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people > > invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then > > no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples > > of neglect. > > > > As someone who's team contributes to both ON and SFW I very much object to > that allegation we apply the same quality to all our work regardless of what > consolidation it goes in to. We choose the consolidation we deliver to > carefully based on the requirements of the component we are working on. Why do components in ONNV receive regular maintenance and security updates and those in SFW do not even receive critical security updates? Sun treats the software life cycle differently, based on the choice of consolidation. The consolidation choice defines the importance of components and critical software goes into ONNV. > This alias is not an appropriate place for further discussion of this topic > though as it is not related to the Perl case (the quality of the upstream > Perl won't magically change) nor is it actually architectural in nature. This alias is appropriate place, the case describes that the project team will deliver perl 5.10 into SFW instead of ONNV, making this RELEVANT. The project team is free to remove the notion of SFW from this case and deliver the perl upgrade into ONNV instead. In that case I will drop my objections. -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer \ |-..-'` /\/\ /\/\ `--` `--` From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed May 27 09:51:27 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RGpRwJ002190 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 09:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGpEFZ055694 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:51:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00I0RATQCG00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00ANCATI45E0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 09:51:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RGpFrq052684; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:51:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4RGoDLa020603; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:50:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4RGoD57020598; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:50:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:50:13 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Cc: Darren J Moffat , James.Walker@sun.com, "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18973.28485.112674.886936@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-5 X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> <4A1D68F6.3020700@Sun.COM> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id n4RGpRwJ002190 Status: RO Content-Length: 2680 writes: > > As someone who's team contributes to both ON and SFW I very much object to > > that allegation we apply the same quality to all our work regardless of what > > consolidation it goes in to. We choose the consolidation we deliver to > > carefully based on the requirements of the component we are working on. > > Why do components in ONNV receive regular maintenance and security > updates and those in SFW do not even receive critical security > updates? > Sun treats the software life cycle differently, based on the choice of > consolidation. The consolidation choice defines the importance of > components and critical software goes into ONNV. You'll need to pursue your grievances with the updates of various bits of software with the folks charged with updating them. This simply has nothing whatsoever to do with consolidation, and the "policy" you're inferring (and that you've described above) does not and has never existed. > > This alias is not an appropriate place for further discussion of this topic > > though as it is not related to the Perl case (the quality of the upstream > > Perl won't magically change) nor is it actually architectural in nature. > > This alias is appropriate place, the case describes that the project > team will deliver perl 5.10 into SFW instead of ONNV, making this > RELEVANT. > > The project team is free to remove the notion of SFW from this case > and deliver the perl upgrade into ONNV instead. In that case I will > drop my objections. Your objects are not architectural in nature. You've stated that you know something that we don't about the way in which the SFW consolidation is maintained, and that this will somehow affect the quality of bits that are delivered. It's been explained several times now how this is not true, and that it follows from a demonstrably false premise. There are different maintainers for different bits of software. Some are very active. Some are not. Some bits in ON are stale. Some bits in SFW are fresh. There is no special "rule" saying that Sun will spend its money updating ON but not SFW, regardless of what you may have inferred from bugs you've seen, and thus no special reason *based on quality* to prefer one over the other when importing external open source. Your beef is with the maintainers of those stale packages. File bugs and pursue them. Don't claim a priori that separate individuals will do the same. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM Wed May 27 12:02:34 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RJ2Wc9000354 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RJ2Fo3025581 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 20:02:32 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB0020BGW46300@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 12:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com ([192.18.6.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00LUDGW3R4A0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 12:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-emea-09.sun.com (gmp-eb-lb-1-fe3.eu.sun.com [192.18.6.10]) by gmp-eb-inf-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RJ2RGf000036 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:02:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-emea-09.sun.com by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) id <0KKB00A00GRJIC00@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 20:02:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.199] ([unknown] [129.156.173.199]) by fe-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 64bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KKB001B2GVXUM60@fe-emea-09.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Wed, 27 May 2009 20:02:21 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 20:02:21 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <18973.26969.248191.246547@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM To: James Carlson Cc: =?ISO-8859-5?Q?=DE=DB=EC=D3=D0_=DA=E0=EB=D6=D0=DD=DE=D2=E1=DA=D0=EF?= , James.Walker@Sun.COM, John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@Sun.COM Message-id: <4A1D8E3D.1060904@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-5 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> <18973.26969.248191.246547@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20090127) Status: RO Content-Length: 910 James Carlson wrote: > writes: >> I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people >> invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then >> no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples >> of neglect. > > Feel free to volunteer some help to clean up whatever it is you think > is "trashy," but your argument holds no architectural water. There's > no reason whatever to believe that the same unmodified source code > will be magically worse if built inside SFW than if it were built in > ON, or better simply because it's moved to ON. In fact with OpenSSL I can actually prove that moving it out of ON into SFW will allow us to built it: * to a higher quality, * faster performing, * easier to keep up with critical security fixes * easier to maintain * allow building the OpenSSL FIPS container -- Darren J Moffat From cyril.plisko@gmail.com Wed May 27 12:08:43 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RJ8hsX021827 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RJ8cE0021863; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00407H6H9100@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:08:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00J7IH6HBM80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:08:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay44i.sun.com ([192.5.209.118]) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RIwG8u020289; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:08:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.mms.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.221.232] [160.41.221.232]) by relay44i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1816552; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:08:40 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay45i.sun.com (relay45i.sun.com [192.5.209.94]) by mms49es.mms.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3701674; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:08:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-ew0-f157.google.com ([209.85.219.157] [209.85.219.157]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4266154; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:06:06 +0000 (Z) Received: by mail-ew0-f157.google.com with SMTP id 1so5006560ewy.8 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.26.70 with SMTP id b48mr143995wea.141.1243451101665; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:04:41 +0300 From: Cyril Plisko Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: Sender: cyril.plisko@gmail.com To: =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= Cc: James.Walker@sun.com, John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XGrTN2KxxYpgGWi9bRXeXC3RSiqfi/Tr6snUFjFZPQ8=; b=Uh0qhWjwK7xT+sD8prjVX0MVLgSQ/RaoNpJnI0e632rPA+UbBqto5VyOJKDQzy6IWj 01RS1qLsZuhmQ4+uhxu+imtJLDer6ijKUJMaYZeyhc2Pr/NWAFp8MSzipdk2rBuxMyjV yQmPMPnQQ0Uk9S6scoaefxtR/O6toaXNgTtoo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=QF7CuT9Ogjce3N2sACJlP23TRVjWhDGMPhO439u2JPhVOiEmVezhdIloHayjSLBrYY WXY9D4Dq5YMyPbRa3fVfGtBp6aK9m+wlIHys/Pw7KdGcaBRKZT1W8MkEF0T3huUIMKie Cjq4Nsg5jhAmGWZ1yQlZF1py54RG2bSluX8Ts= X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Google-Sender-Auth: fde0990a17a007a9 X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.052sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1C3336.7060706@sun.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id n4RJ8hsX021827 Status: RO Content-Length: 572 2009/5/27 : >> I disagree. In general, the SFW pkgs are very high quality. > > I disagree. SFW is the trashcan repository of Opensolaris where people > invest little love for details. Software is integrated once and then > no one cares about the software - gcc, python, bash are prime examples > of neglect. Just a nit - there is no Python in SFW consolidation. It is rather in JDS consolidation. There are some extra python modules that are being delivered through SFW consolidation, though. -- Regards, Cyril From Norm.Jacobs@Sun.COM Wed May 27 12:59:17 2009 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RJxGJD008655 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RJxFaF011008; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00C0HJIRFL00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.63]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00LO5JIPRJB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.7.251.237] (punchin-jacobs.SFBay.Sun.COM [10.7.251.237]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4RJxCgg993107; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 14:59:12 -0500 From: Norm Jacobs Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout 06/02/2009] In-reply-to: To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: James Carlson , Rich Burridge , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@Sun.COM Message-id: <4A1D9B90.6070604@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090323) Status: RO Content-Length: 2752 I. Szczesniak wrote: > On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: > >> Rich Burridge writes: >> > Perl 5.10.x is binary-incompatible with 5.8.x, so it will be >> > necessary >> > to declare 5.8.x EOF in OpenSolaris, and remove it in a later >> > version. >> > A separate case will be submitted for this. >> >> Is the EOF announcement for 5.8.x part of this case (with only the >> removal being a future case), or are both parts for a later case? >> (I'd argue that the former is both simple and likely makes more sense >> here; if it's the latter, then please explain the status of 5.10.x >> alongside 5.8.x.) >> >> > Unlike previous releases, 5.10.x will not integrate in to O/N, but >> > will instead move to SFW. >> >> I'll be glad to see it go (eventually) for the improvement in build >> time, >> > > Is this the only justification? Bits delivered via SFW commonly have > substandard quality and are very poorly integrated. I fear that > putting a critical system component such as perl into SFW will affect > the quality of Opensolaris as whole piece. > There are plenty of "cricital" open source bits in SFW. The quality of the software delivered into any consolidation is a function of the commitment by the software owner to is proper configuration, care, and feeding. Unfortunately, there are varing levels of commitment to the care and feeding of software in Solaris. This is true across all consolidations, not just SFW. If you find any of the software delivered into SFW (or any other consolidation) to be inferior, please file bugs against it. You might find that the owners of these bits are more than happy to work with you to resolve issues. If they are not, we need to know. When the software integrated, the owner agreed to a level of commitment to it's care and feeding. For the various bits of open source software that come into SFW, that level of commitment varies from tracking the community releases and fixes to more active participation. On occasion, software is purposefully held back or crippled for reasons that may not be readily apparent. Though, I would say that's the exception, rather than the rule. > If there is no other justification build time please keep perl in > ONNV. Or derail this case and write memo why perl should move to SFW. > Though I agree that ON build time isn't a justification for moving from ON to SFW, I am sure that they have other valid reasons to do so. That being said, with the exception of requiring contracts for use of consolidation level (or lower) interfaces, which consolidation a particular software component delivers to isn't an architectural decision. -Norm From roland.mainz@nrubsig.org Wed May 27 13:44:25 2009 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RKiPgd009668 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RKiOLn000572; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:44:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00809LM0B700@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:44:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00JGVLLZ6YE0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:44:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (ip121.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.121]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RKYPxn002320; Wed, 27 May 2009 20:44:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.13] [160.41.208.13]) by relay11i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3622233; Wed, 27 May 2009 20:44:11 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (relay15i.sun.com [129.179.4.125]) by mmp13es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-68318840; Wed, 27 May 2009 20:44:10 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-01.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.41] [151.189.21.41]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4622884; Wed, 27 May 2009 20:44:10 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-11-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-11-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.28]) by mx.arcor.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9511332CB5; Wed, 27 May 2009 22:44:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (mail-in-07.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.47]) by mail-in-11-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796703465AA; Wed, 27 May 2009 22:44:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (dslb-084-059-073-224.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.59.73.224]) by mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 847223CA5B0; Wed, 27 May 2009 22:44:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nrubsig.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RKi3rj001040; Wed, 27 May 2009 22:44:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:44:03 +0200 From: Roland Mainz Subject: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout06/02/2009] Sender: gisburn@jupiterb48.nrubsig.org To: John Sonnenschein Cc: Rich Burridge , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4A1DA613.B54262CF@nrubsig.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.11 sun4u) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 mail-in-07.arcor-online.net 847223CA5B0 X-Antispam: No, score=0.0/5.0, scanned in 0.165sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 2133 Rich Burridge wrote: > > I'm sponsoring the following fast track for John Sonnenschein. > The requested release binding is Minor. The fast track times out > on 06/02/2009. > > ---- > > 1. Introduction > > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > > PSARC/2009/315 Update Perl to version 5.10.x [snip] > Script interface (Uncommitted) > --------------------------- > > There have been no major changes between 5.8.x and 5.10.x > except > backwards compatible extensions. > > Incompatible changes are as follows: > > * Packing and UTF-8 strings > * Byte/character count feature in unpack() > * The $* and $# variables have been removed > * substr() lvalues are no longer fixed-length > * Parsing of -f _ > * :unique > * Effect of pragmas in eval > * chdir FOO > * Handling of .pmc files > * $^V is now a version object instead of a v-string > * @- and @+ in patterns > * $AUTOLOAD can now be tainted > * Tainting and printf > * undef and signal handlers > * strictures and dereferencing in defined() > * (?p{}) has been removed > * Pseudo-hashes have been removed > * Removal of the bytecode compiler and of perlcc > * Removal of the JPL > * Recursive inheritance detected earlier > > Full explanation of changes are included in > perl5100delta.pod.txt > (in the case materials directory) One thing I'd like to see is to swtch the "perl" build to use SFIO (available via libast) for better I/O performance (we need to setup an interface contract between OS/Net and SFWNV for that). Originally this was planned for the "next perl update" but that somehow drowned with the RIF of Tim Sparlin's team... ;-( ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) From roland.mainz@nrubsig.org Wed May 27 14:55:18 2009 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RLtHqI011244 for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 14:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4RLtA81012386; Wed, 27 May 2009 22:55:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKB00L0HOVZDV00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 15:55:11 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKB00CCNOVYNY40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 27 May 2009 15:55:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n4RLkGIv003359; Wed, 27 May 2009 21:55:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.mmp.us.syntegra.com ([160.41.208.14] [160.41.208.14]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3626818; Wed, 27 May 2009 21:55:10 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (relay15i.sun.com [129.179.4.125]) by mmp14es.mmp.us.syntegra.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-105077; Wed, 27 May 2009 21:55:09 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-14.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.54] [151.189.21.54]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-4791701; Wed, 27 May 2009 21:55:08 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.16]) by mx.arcor.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D841428ACFD; Wed, 27 May 2009 23:55:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-03.arcor-online.net (mail-in-03.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.43]) by mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D05E3ABD98; Wed, 27 May 2009 23:55:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (dslb-084-059-073-224.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.59.73.224]) by mail-in-03.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACD0C2C2A1E; Wed, 27 May 2009 23:55:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nrubsig.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jupiterb48.nrubsig.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4RLt0lK001054; Wed, 27 May 2009 23:55:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 23:55:00 +0200 From: Roland Mainz Subject: Delivering ksh93 through SFWNV instead of OS/Net ? / was: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout06/02/2009] Sender: gisburn@jupiterb48.nrubsig.org To: James Carlson , "on-discuss@opensolaris.org" Cc: "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Rich Burridge Reply-to: "on-discuss@opensolaris.org" Message-id: <4A1DB6B4.25944CAA@nrubsig.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.11 sun4u) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 mail-in-03.arcor-online.net ACD0C2C2A1E X-Antispam: No, score=-0.2/5.0, scanned in 0.187sec at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smf-spamd v1.3.1 - http://smfs.sf.net/ References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18972.11779.422939.81423@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 4802 James Carlson wrote: > I. Szczesniak writes: > > On 5/26/09, James Carlson wrote: [snip] > With either consolidation, the Perl code that's present is essentially > just what comes from the open source, as it is with _many_ projects > that happen to deliver through ON -- including, incidentally, ksh93, > where we're not doing extensive code or design reviews up to the > normal ON standards, because they'd just be infeasible. > > The big difference between the two is in makefiles: you use your own > in SFW, but you generally must use ON's in ON. That difference is why > I argued (more than once) for delivering ksh93 through SFW. Erm... why is the ksh93-integration project dragged into this discussion and why is this particular topic dragged out of it's grave (again (anyone remeber the "Cadaver Synod" [1] ? =:-) )) ? ksh93 was _intentionally_ integrated into OS/Net because... - ... ksh88 is in OS/Net and ksh93 ws "grandfather'ed" into OS/Net as replacement for ksh88 (with the explicit comment that this is a special decision and should not be used as precendent by future projects) - ... ksh88 and ksh93 have an "intimate" relationship with libc (e.g. to implement |libc::wordexp()|) - ... it was planned to gradually "upgrade" some system commands with those in libcmd (which was implemented with ksh93-integration update1 and is now being continued with update2, update3 and update4) - ... Bourne shell is in OS/Net and IMO the "default system shell" (which is likely going to be ksh93 (see OpenSolaris/Indiana)) should be part of OS/Net and not in a different consolidation - ... we intended to use SFIO for perl (which was in OS/Net during that time) - ... we wanted libast::stdio for OS/Net applications (as consolidation-private interface) for I/O-heavy applications (since libast's stdio is significantly faster than libc's current stdio implementation (for Solaris 3.x we may get a "stdio replacement" project to replace the old stdio implementation with the libast one)) - ... we wanted to replace the existing (closed-source) pattern matching functions (e.g. |regex()|, |fnmatch()|) with the code from libast (which is opensource, faster and has very usefull extensions (which we could propose as POSIX standard if we get two implementations)) - <... AFAIK there are more reasons but I am too tired to dig them all out today (again) ...> > It'd be > simpler and lower overhead, and there's no necessary entanglement with > the rest of the core OS. I disagree that it would be "simpler and lower overhead". Yes, I know we could've "dumped" the ast-ksh package into SFWNV and build ksh93 as an monolothic all-in-one binary. However we intended to make "maximum use" of the technology provided by ksh93 and AST and therefore we decided to deliver ksh93 into OS/Net (after having three conference calls about his topic (that's why I am not happy that this decision is challanged again)), including shipping ksh93 as set of shared libraries that other applications can use it. Without doing that we would've _never_ done all the fine-tuning, testing (including integrating ksh93's own test suite into OS/Net), benchmarking, adoption for OS/Net's needs+rules (which helped us finding lots of bugs in ksh93+libast) etc. and we would've never been able to do all the work with updating the POSIX commands in OS/Net (which will now grow into it's own "POSIX commands community" (which should act as umbrella for lots of smaller projects to improve Solaris's (POSIX) command line utilities)). And "yes", it's possible to move ksh93 to SFWNV, but it would require _lots_ of work to do the move (which I do not have) and we would need lots of paperwork for interface contracts between OS/Net and SFWNV which create so much overhead that the project would quickly drown+die from that (and we could throw the idea for the POSIX commands community into the bin). Beyond that SFWNV currently has big build issues which make even a basic contribution a _PAIN_ for external people with limited resources - for example incrmental builds do not work (which means you have to clobber and rebuild everything from scratch over and over again and that just takes ~28-30h on my laptop). That's why I tried to avoid having any involvement with SFWNV unless neccesary (well, I now signed-up to do the "bash4" work to avoid that we end-up with the mess for "bash3" (which doesn't even pass it's own test suite the way it was integrated into SFWNV)) or if someone pays me for that pain. [1]=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod ---- Bye, Roland P.S.: Setting Reply-To: to on-discuss@opensolaris.org -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu May 28 04:20:54 2009 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n4SBKsW6001822 for ; Thu, 28 May 2009 04:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4SBKrSP046986 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Thu, 28 May 2009 05:20:54 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0KKC00J0PQ6SBI00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 28 May 2009 04:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-east-02.east.sun.com ([129.148.13.5]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0KKC00IZIQ6QCW00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Thu, 28 May 2009 04:20:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by dm-east-02.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n4SBKmZe007353; Thu, 28 May 2009 07:20:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.local [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4SBJjLu023589; Thu, 28 May 2009 07:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n4SBJj3I023586; Thu, 28 May 2009 07:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 07:19:45 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: Delivering ksh93 through SFWNV instead of OS/Net ? / was: Re: Update Perl to version 5.10.x [PSARC/2009/315 FastTrack timeout06/02/2009] In-reply-to: <4A1DB6B4.25944CAA@nrubsig.org> To: "on-discuss@opensolaris.org" Cc: "I. Szczesniak" , John Sonnenschein , PSARC-ext@sun.com, Rich Burridge Message-id: <18974.29521.512380.401619@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704 References: <4A1BFE13.8050500@sun.com> <18972.2291.257906.236372@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <18972.11779.422939.81423@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <4A1DB6B4.25944CAA@nrubsig.org> Status: RO Content-Length: 738 Roland Mainz writes: > Erm... why is the ksh93-integration project dragged into this discussion > and why is this particular topic dragged out of it's grave (again > (anyone remeber the "Cadaver Synod" [1] ? =:-) )) ? It's here just to make the point that the distinction between ON and SFW is in build rules, and not in quality. In other words, we didn't choose to put ksh93 into ON because it would have suffered from poor quality had it gone into SFW. Thus, the previous poster's contention is simply wrong. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677