| To: [email protected]
Cc: buildhelp, ric
Subject: re What is the backing tree for OSF V1.2?
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 93 12:37:44 +28716
From: "Joshua M. Friedman, OSF/UNIX SDE 381-1548" <jmf>
X-Mts: smtp
Dennis, the final release DEC/OSF1 V1.2 product is represented in
the ode backing trees called "alpha.bl012" and "x11.bl012".
-josh
------- Forwarded Message
|
|
I also received the following mail from Jim McGinness and I agree with
Jim's suggestion of creating links to the archival trees that will be more
descriptive. It sounds like a good idea.
--dennis
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1993 00:12:19 -0400
From: flume::jmcg (Jim McGinness)
To: flume::jmf, paradis
Cc: flume::buildhelp, flume::ric
Subject: Re: re What is the backing tree for OSF V1.2?
Josh has answered Dennis's apparent question but we haven't addressed the
actual question. Should a description field be added to odefstab so
"odemount -list" can be more descriptive? Do we expect newcomers to intuit
that alpha.bl012 is a tree preserving the state of DEC OSF/1 AXP V1.2 as
we sent it to SSB? Should we create links for some of the archival trees
with names like SSB_tin SSB_silver?
-- jmcg
|
| Date Of Receipt: 28-SEP-1993 11:44:13.30
From: ALPHA::"[email protected]" "Carolyn Hurley 28-Sep-1993 1144"
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Subj: Re: request
Rob,
Are you planning to submit this file again with changes or
did you accidently submit the file as part of a set?
If you actually have changes to the file, I would suggest
you just submit the version with the changes as rev 1.1.5.3, otherwise
I will work on backing out the submit and ensuring that
Rev 1.1.3.12 of the file is restored.
/Carolyn
============================
Return-Path: lembree
Delivery-Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 10:16:41 -0400
Return-Path: lembree
Received: by flambe.zk3.dec.com; id AA00410; Tue, 28 Sep 1993 10:16:38 -0400
Received: by quarry.zk3.dec.com; id AA05951; Tue, 28 Sep 1993 10:16:35 -0400
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: reng
Subject: request
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 10:16:35 +28716
From: lembree
X-Mts: smtp
Hi,
Could you please outdate ./server/ddx/dec/sfb/Imakefile
revision 1.1.5.2? I checked in a no-op (i.e., no changes), and need
to correct this in the Sterling X tree.
Thanks,
Rob Lembree
X Server PL
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Rob Lembree Unix Software Group |
| Digital Equipment Corp. (603) 881-0901 |
| Mailstop: ZKO3-3/Y15 (dtn) 381-0901 |
| 110 Spitbook Road [email protected] |
| Nashua, NH 03062-2698 decnet: quarry::lembree |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
| Date Of Receipt: 28-SEP-1993 14:02:37.53
From: ALPHA::"[email protected]" "Carolyn Hurley 28-Sep-1993 1402"
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Subj: Re: request
Rob,
It's much easier and more correct if you submit the file
again with the changes in place.
/Carolyn
===========================
Return-Path: lembree
Delivery-Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 13:03:02 -0400
Return-Path: lembree
Received: by flambe.zk3.dec.com; id AA04866; Tue, 28 Sep 1993 13:03:01 -0400
Received: by quarry.zk3.dec.com; id AA15431; Tue, 28 Sep 1993 13:03:01 -0400
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
To: zap
Subject: Re: request
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 28 Sep 93 11:44:22 EDT."
<[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 93 13:03:01 +28716
From: lembree
X-Mts: smtp
I had changes to put into place, but checked in an unmodified
file. I'd like the changes to be where they were originally
meant to go (1.1.5.2).
-r
|