[1583] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Fwd: IRIX Y2K compliance
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ted McCabe)
Thu Jan 7 16:15:57 1999
In-Reply-To: <199901072101.QAA19751@mozart.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 16:15:38 -0500
To: "Naomi B. Schmidt" <nschmidt@MIT.EDU>, Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
From: Ted McCabe <ted@MIT.EDU>
Cc: release-team@MIT.EDU, owls@MIT.EDU
At 4:01 PM -0500 1/7/99, Naomi B. Schmidt wrote:
>>While we can expect an IRIX 6.5 deployment in the Fall of
>>this year, we can't expect everyone will have taken it.
>
>Why not? We know where all the Athenized SGI's are from our
>database, and we can just do a concerted push, warning people of
>the consequences if they don't take the update. People are aware
>that Y2K is a problem in general, so it won't look as if we're
>just incompetent if we provide them with a solution and say that
>they have to take it.
>
>There may be something that I haven't thought of, in which case
>I'm open to being convinced.
To give a specific example, there is at least one SGI that acts as a server
for ops. Thus we would have the extra overhead of qualifying our
modifications for an SGI server for a new OS in a rather short interval.
Ops itself is troubled by the issue of having to upgrade a machine in a
short interval and the more lead time the better. Skirting most of the
specific issues involved and focusing only on the time issue, we probably
would prefer to upgrade our server to the latest patch release, which we
could start working on now, over upgrading the server to 6.5.
--Ted
