[7339] in SIPB bug reports
Re: SGI volumes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Garry Zacheiss)
Sat Jul 24 16:53:45 1999
To: Salvatore Valente <svalente@MIT.EDU>
Cc: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 24 Jul 1999 15:40:53 EDT."
<199907241940.PAA28243@quiche-lorraine.mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 16:53:38 -0400
From: Garry Zacheiss <zacheiss@MIT.EDU>
>> /mit/sipb/arch% ls -ld sgi*
>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 sgi_53 -> ../machtype/sgi
>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 sgi_62 -> ../machtype/sgi
>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 sgi_63 -> ../machtype/sgi
>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 sgi_65 -> ../machtype/sgi6
>>
>> I don't know anything about it, but, at first glance, this looks kind
>> of wrong. Does anyone know if it would be better for the sgi_62 and
>> sgi_63 links to point to sgi6 instead of sgi?
That setup is my fault. The rationale behind it was that I've
encountered several programs so far that will fail to run properly under
Irix 6.5 when built under Irix 6.2 or 6.3 (sipb xscreensaver and xmcd
are the first two examples that come to mind), and so we were going to
need a seperate volume for Irix 6.5 binaries. I chose to use the
sipb.sgi6 volume because, while it existed and had a symlink farm in it,
there were no symlinks in /mit/sipb/arch pointing at it, so it clearly
wasn't be used.
I don't think the need for a seperate volume for Irix 6.5
has changed since I set this up, although I agree the naming is kind of
deceptive at this point. Since everything in machtype/sgi runs on irix
5.3 - Irix 6.2 to the best of my knowledge, but doesn't run on 6.5,
might it make sense to rename machtype/sgi6 to machtype/sgi65 and rename
the volume similarly, so that the setup makes more sense?
Garry
