[3605] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Sanity check: Removing Sparc 5 from W92 Test Cluster
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dryfoo@MIT.EDU)
Tue Dec 3 17:29:57 2002
From: dryfoo@MIT.EDU
Message-Id: <200212032229.RAA17882@thelonious.mit.edu>
To: Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
cc: owls@MIT.EDU, release-team@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "03 Dec 2002 17:20:55 EST."
<1038954055.7047.46.camel@tokata.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 17:29:55 -0500
Bill,
I can see no pitfalls in your plan, so to speak.
We need to be able to rely on our own STATUS designations such as
"DEAD". Customers/clients need to believe our STATUS codes.
Were we still willing to do debugging for DEAD iron, then we shouldn't
be calling it "DEAD". (Insert appropriate Monty Python Holy Grail
plague joke here.)
-- Gary D.
} I have a SunBlade 150 to put into the W92 Test Cluster.
} I was thinking of installing it in place of Pitfall, the Sparc 5.
}
} Sparc 5's have been listed as "Dead" in the Athena LifeCycle Summary
} page as of June 2002. (Athena 9.1 is Ultra-only.)
}
} We have not had requests for debugging on the Sparc 5 platform, so I
} propose to remove the Sparc 5 hardware, install the Sunblade 150, and
} call the new hardware with the old name Pitfall.
}
} Does this sound sane?
}
} -wdc
}
