Closed
Bug 184523
Opened 22 years ago
Closed 21 years ago
support Solaris Packaging in NSS 3.3.3
Categories
(NSS :: Build, enhancement, P1)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
3.3.3
People
(Reporter: kirk.erickson, Assigned: mhein)
Details
Attachments
(2 files)
22.30 KB,
patch
|
wtc
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
3.56 KB,
text/plain
|
Details |
We need support for Solaris Packaging in NSS 3.3.3. The differences between NSS_3_3_2_RTM and NSS_3_3_2_SUN_PKG_BRANCH NSS_3_3_2_RTM need to checked into NSS_3_3_BRANCH. Related bug: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158683
Comment 1•22 years ago
|
||
This is fine. We should review the changes one last time before landing them on the NSS_3_3_BRANCH. Kirk, could you generate a patch? Make sure you use the -uN option for cvs diff. This generates a unified diff with the new files included.
Assignee: wtc → kirk.erickson
Priority: -- → P1
Target Milestone: --- → 3.3.3
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•22 years ago
|
||
tairji.lee@sun.com (Ty Lee) is generating the patch. Sonja or I will attach it for review. I attempted to add Ty to the cc'list, but apparently he has no account.
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•22 years ago
|
||
Before apply, create new subdirs: mkdir -p mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/common_files/ mkdir -p mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/SUNWtlsx mkdir -p mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/SUNWtls patch <XXX.patch I tested applying the patch on a different machine and successfully built with all combinations of: BUILD_OPT=1 USE_64=1 Ready for review by Wan-Teh.
Comment 4•22 years ago
|
||
We also need to generate a prototype file with the solarispackage, this has been missed in the original implementation of the package for NSS 3.3.2 the prototype is not crucial to the package itself, but it seems to be absolutely necessary to generate a patch to the package. The combination of prototype_com and prototype_sparc (or prototype_com and prototype_i386) is not accepted by buildpatch. sorry about noticing this so late.
Comment 5•22 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 108990 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch for NSS_3_3_BRANCH Kirk, You can go ahead and check this patch in on the NSS_3_3_BRANCH. I am qualified to review the new files in mozilla/security/nss/pkg. After you check in this patch I can verify that the new files are the same as the versions on the NSS_3_3_2_SUN_PKG_BRANCH with the exception of the version number.
Attachment #108990 -
Flags: review+
Comment 6•22 years ago
|
||
Sorry, that should read "I am NOT qualified to review the new files in mozilla/security/nss/pkg".
Comment 7•22 years ago
|
||
--- pasting in Ty's email below. I'll check it in with the suggestions that Ty has made. This will be a partial fix for this bug, because Ty is still working on getting the prototype into the format that solaris buildpatch requires. ---- I have reviewed the NSS patch. It looked fine to me except the following modifications must be made: 1. In mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/Makefile.com PRODUCT_VERSION = 3.3.2 PRODUCT_NAME = NSS_3_3_2_RTM --- changed to ---> PRODUCT_VERSION = 3.3.3 PRODUCT_NAME = NSS_3_3_3 2. Files under PKG has the CVS $Id expanded with information in NSS_3_3_2_SUN_PKG_BRANCH. Please have them removed. Here is an example: diff -b -r mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/SUNWtlsx/prototype_sparc /data/nss33Branch/mozilla/security/nss/pkg/solaris/SUNWtlsx/prototype_sparc 5c5 #ident "$Id: prototype_sparc,v 1.1.2.1 2002/09/06 00:45:29 kirk.erickson%sun.com Exp $" --- changed to ---> #ident "$Id: $" Thanks, Ty
Comment 9•21 years ago
|
||
no, don't close it yet, there is another mistake in the packages, in that we do not depend on specific versions.
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•21 years ago
|
||
Michael raised the question of introducing package dependencies back in October. I've attached Danek's response to the question for reference. Basically, the Sun convention is to bank on linker smarts: "The way it was explained to me was that this kind of dependency information has, empirically here at sun, been shown to be better implemented as a run-time dependency -- i.e., through proper use of linker hints and dynamic, programmatic checks of the required interfaces (and stepping down functionality as necessary). We've found that this is far more robust against all the weird things that customers end up doing to your packages."
Reporter | ||
Comment 11•21 years ago
|
||
Not sure if this is done or not. Sonja wanted to deal with package dependencies. Reassigned to her.
Assignee: kirk.erickson → sonja.mirtitsch
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Comment 13•21 years ago
|
||
Marked the bug fixed because the work to support Solaris packaging is done. Please open a new RFE if we still need to add package dependencies (see comment 8 and later).
Severity: normal → enhancement
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•