Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for?

On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Folks,
>
>>> I'll see what I can do on the NetBSD and Solaris fronts.
>>
>> IMO, the Solaris one is probably more important than NetBSD.
>
> Solaris is taken care of ... should be online in a week or two. Sun DBTG Q.A.
> set up in the Sun labs:
>
> Solaris 9 + Sparc + SunCC
> Solaris 8 + Sparc + SunCC
> Solaris 10 + Sparc + SunCC
> Solaris 10 + x86 + SunCC
> Solaris 10 + x86 + gcc
> Solaris Nevada + Sparc + SunCC
> Solaris Nevada + x86 + SunCC
> Solaris Nevada + x86 + gcc
>
> ... which ought to cover most of the platforms we're interested in from
> Solaris. The 8 and 9 machines will just build current, but the 10 and Nevada
> machines will build CVS, 8.1, 8.2 and rotationally older versions (once each
> week). We're building in as many options as we have support for, including
> perl, kerberos (on Nevada), Dtrace (on 8.2) and integer-datetimes.
>
Given Sun handling Solaris, my question is:

1) what os(s) do we need more coverage on
2) what collection of options for OS' in 1?

LER

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893