----- "Max Matveev" <makc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:26:27 +1100 (EST), Nathan Scott wrote:
>
> nscott> Are there any of these that you think are critical for 3.0
> Max?
>
> I'd argue all of 'em or none:
OK, good, the latter won.
> nscott> for these... is that OK?
> As long as yerall understand that it means that 3.0.0 does not
> support Solaris.
Its unfortunate, but hopefully next time we will be a bit more organised
(I'll make sure Solaris build gets at least attempted earlier on for the
major releases).
Probably the next Windows release will be done from a 3.0.1 code base too;
2.9.3 was good for that platform, and there's likely to be one or two more
things fallout from our recent production deploy before another release is
done there.
> >> Don't change pointer types of pmCtime's arguments
> nscott> This one has me nervous... was that observed on 64 bit
> Linux?
>
> The code in tz.c is different between Solaris and Linux: on Solaris
> ...
> No new warnings - I've actually compiled this on Linux: in most cases
> pmCtime gets the right pointer, either from struct timeval or from
> the
> local variable of type time_t, the only place which was passing wrong
> one was in pmloglabel which I've changed to use local stack variable
> ...
OK, make sense - thanks.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|