| To: | Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | pmdasample source vs binary & QA testing |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 13 Feb 2014 19:21:57 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1603650868.6845934.1392337086261.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | D/OjS7PfACixp+fMyCubVh2VDkzNfA== |
| Thread-topic: | pmdasample source vs binary & QA testing |
Hi Ken, Just FYI - if doing any testing atm, as a result of the RPM "multilib" changes, we no longer ship a pre-built version of pmdasample. We ship source & makefile, like the other demo PMDAs now, which helps make the development packages architecture neutral of course. So may need an ./Install in pmdas/sample (that automatically does the build) before you next run QA. cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Possible pmmgr issue?, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Possible pmmgr issue?, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Previous by Thread: | debian package installation failure, Ken McDonell |
| Next by Thread: | RE: pmdasample source vs binary & QA testing, Ken McDonell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |