|Bill Allombert on Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:27:15 +0100|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: looking for UltraSparc3i binary|
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 12:16:02AM +0100, Alain SMEJKAL wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 11:59:34PM +0100, Alain SMEJKAL wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Igor Schein" <email@example.com> > > > To: "Alain SMEJKAL" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > > > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:43 PM > > > Subject: Re: looking for UltraSparc3i binary > > > > > > > > > > Is UltraSparc3i a requirement? How about ultra3cu? > > > > > > Ultra3cu will be nice too, I suppose it will not induce significant changes > > > and binary should be compatible. 64-bit mode is more essential for that > > > test. > > > > See attached. readline is disabled, which shouldn't matter for > > testing purposes anyway. > > Thanks so much for your prompt help! Since you have access to solaris box, could you look at the bug report #429 ? Thanks in advance, Bill.