pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] pcp updates

To: Max Matveev <makc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] pcp updates
From: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:26:27 +1100 (EST)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <19149.26327.739438.847084@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hey Max,

----- "Max Matveev" <makc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I've got a few changes in the solaris branch of my repository (pull
> request at the end of the message). Some of them are required to
> build
> 3.0.0 on Solaris, others are fixing old bugs introduced before 3.0.0
> -
> feel free to mix'n'match.

Are there any of these that you think are critical for 3.0 Max?
We have run a fair bit of QA on the current bits & deployed them
to quite a few test machines here, so unless there is something
pressing hiding in here, I'm thinking we should off for a 3.0.1
for these... is that OK?

We could cherry-pick the changes to Solaris-specific files, but it
seems like maybe its not worth it without the rest.

> Max Matveev (6):
>       Increase table sizes for dbpmda's lexer
>       Explicitly mark bitfield sign in pmUnits.
>       Treat UDP overflows as counter
>       Deal with default lex on Solaris
>       Don't change pointer types of pmCtime's arguments

This one has me nervous... was that observed on 64 bit Linux?
And isn't it going to introduce new compiler warnings (maybe
copying to interim variables of the right pointer type would
make this all safer?)

>       Pass information about compiler into Perl PMDA makefiles.
> 

cheers.

-- 
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>