| Date Of Receipt: 14-FEB-1996 09:39:29.43
From: SMURF::ALPHA::"vandyck@cardinal.zk3.dec.com" "14-Feb-1996 0936"
To: buckley@eng.pko.dec.com
CC: buildhelp@zk3.dec.com
Subj: Re: Submission info or more info than //secret.zk3.dec.com/rengweb
I assume you have access to the ptos pool, else you couldn't build against it.
When I searched the sup logfiles for the submit tree and the nightly tree, I
did not find a pko entry. If you sup the pool (and you do have access) you get
the logs, SNAPSHOT et al.
If you had them and grep'ed the SNAPSHOT for libcxx, you'd find:
grep libcxx SNAPSHOT
./usr/ccs/lib/libcxx/Makefile,v 1.1.2.4
./usr/ccs/lib/libcxx/alpha/cxxl_messages.cat,v 1.1.2.3
./usr/ccs/lib/libcxx/alpha/libcxx.a,v 1.1.2.10
./usr/ccs/lib/libcxx/alpha/machdep.mk,v 1.1.2.2
./usr/shlib/libcxx/Makefile,v 1.1.2.8
./usr/shlib/libcxx/alpha/machdep.mk,v
These submissions.
We get libcxx.a as a binary drop and libcxx.so is generated from it. If you
sup the nightly pool, you get the latest exports, including libcxx.
-Grant
|
| Recently I requested info concerning a problem OPEN3D was encountering
| with CXX libs in platinum bl10(rev345), which you folks forwarded to
| the appropriate people and I received the response below. I had requested
| help from the folks that responded to get the fixed cxx library but have
| never received a reply.
|
| Now, it seems to me that, there have to be additional sources of information
| concerning what is submitted and built in particular builds. From the build
| pool status, one should be able to see the SNAPSHOT and submit log, but I
| do not see how this can be related to the response I received below concernin
g
| the cxx fix. It seems to me that the CXX people were assuming that I
| should be able to figure out where this submission went and how to get it.
|
| Am I missing an important source of information?
|
| Thanks
| Martin
|
|
|
| > Replied: Thu, 08 Feb 96 15:49:13 -0500
| > Replied: "Cathy Kimmel Joly, Language RTLs, 381-0247" <kimmel@khalef.ENET.D
EC.Com>
| > Replied: tomp@zk3.dec.com
| > Replied: buckley@eng.pko.dec.com
| > Replied: sullivan@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com
| > Replied: alan@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com
| > Return-Path: kimmel@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com
| > Received: from jaxom.eng.pko.dec.com by avalon.eng.pko.dec.com; (5.65/1.1.7
.2/22Nov94-1009PM)
| > id AA23074; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 14:42:11 -0500
| > Received: from us2rmc.zko.dec.com by Jaxom.Eng.PKO.DEC.Com; (5.65/1.1.8.2/2
8Sep94-8.2MPM)
| > id AA06659; Thu, 8 Feb 1996 14:42:09 -0500
| > Received: from khalef.enet by us2rmc.zko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94)
| > id AA26696; Thu, 8 Feb 96 14:35:45 -0500
| > Message-Id: <9602081935.AA26696@us2rmc.zko.dec.com>
| > Received: from khalef.enet; by us2rmc.enet; Thu, 8 Feb 96 14:38:41 EST
| > Date: Thu, 8 Feb 96 14:38:41 EST
| > From: "Cathy Kimmel Joly, Language RTLs, 381-0247" <kimmel@khalef.ENET.DEC.
Com>
| > To: tomp@zk3.dec.com, buckley@eng.pko.dec.com
| > Cc: sullivan@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com, alan@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com,
| > kimmel@khalef.ENET.DEC.Com
| > Apparently-To: buckley@eng.pko.dec.com, tomp@zk3.dec.com
| > Subject: RE: fwd: CXX buildhelp request
| >
| > >Could you point me in the right direction. One of our test programs is bu
ild
| > >on Unix3.2C and run on a platinum bl10 machine, which has our OPEN3D libra
ries
| > >installed. This program is segfaulting. The traceback is:
| >
| > The fix for this has already been checked in, so you need to get the latest
| > version of libcxx.so from the Platinum builds.
| >
| > Cathy
|
|
| Date Of Receipt: 14-FEB-1996 12:33:40.45
From: SMURF::ALPHA::"buckley@Eng.PKO.DEC.Com" "14-Feb-1996 1230"
To: "Grant Van Dyck" <vandyck@zk3.dec.com>
CC: buildhelp@zk3.dec.com
Subj: Re: Submission info or more info than //secret.zk3.dec.com/rengweb
Once a pool has been sup'ed to Pko, I know how to find the build information.
The question is related more toward how to determine when to sup newer pools.
We build off of a static copy of a particular ptx11 build. Periodically,
a decision is made to move our development environment to a newer/better
ptx11 build. We have enough trouble keeping our builds clean without
having to deal with compatability problems caused because zk development
changing/updating the ptx11 build process. Developing with a static copy of
ptx11 baselevel minimizes problems for our developers.
As an example, OPEN3D has been building on px11.bl7 for quite some time.
All testing has been on ptos.bl8 and ptos.bl9. Very soon development will
need to migrate to a current version of ptx11. The OPEN3D code will need to
be built with a newer ptx11 and tested on a newer ptos, before our developers
are exposed to the new environment.
We have bits submitted to ptos, bits submitted to ptx11 and zk developers have
submitted bug fixes we have reported. Besides components we would like to
see are the little features that one has to endure while platinum development
finishes up.
It would be nice if there were better summary information to help make the
decision of which version of ptx11 to move development to and which version
of ptos to test with. If this type of info were available, I might have
saved myself a bit of trouble with ptos.bl10.
It would be great if there were a web page that contained a list of known
problems with the different builds and summary of the major fixes and
functionality that were submitted to the different builds. Why was there
a ptos.bl10 pass 1, 2 and 3 as an example.
Just a thought.
thanks
Martin
|