Peter, Peter Tribble wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Susan Sohn<Susan.Sohn at sun.com> wrote: > >> There will be a review meeting on Monday, June 8, to discuss the functional >> spec for the Client redesign. The spec can be found here: >> >> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/auto_install/ai_client_func_spec_0604.pdf >> > > Some comments on the spec: > > 5.1.1 I would much prefer, and believe it would be easier, if the > default would be > to fail immediately if no disk was specified. The user could > explicitly specify "default" > as the disk selection, at which point the guessing algorithm would > come into play. > It is assumed that in the near future, the AI will be used mostly in trial situations, so an out-of-the-box configuration (i.e., without any user modification) that results in an installed system has some attractive points. Unfortunately, it is in conflict with the principle of protecting user data, since it is hard to come up with a useful algorithm that has no chance of deleting user data. For example, we want to use the boot disk, so that when the system reboots, the target OpenSolaris is booted automatically, but the boot disk probably isn't going to be an unformatted, out-of-the-box disk, and historically, when Solaris is installed, the usual default behavior is to use an existing Solaris partition.
So this is still up for debate. Other input on this would be appreciated. > 5.1.1 What if there are multiple bootable drives? Does "boot disk" > mean the first > bootable device? For x86, are you looking at what the BIOS thinks are bootable > devices, or following into grub? At this point, it would not involve looking into grub menus. > For sparc, are you looking at OBP for the list and, > Yes, OBP variables are used. > if so, are you checking whether the listed devices are actually bootable? > Not as yet. Do you see an issue here? > 5.1.2.1 If the largest is chosen, what happens if all valid disk are > the same size? > This was considered a level of detail beyond what is required in the functional spec, but it would be according to a deterministic algorithm that would be the same if the AI was repeated with the same manifest. > 5.1.2.1 For target_device_select_unformatted_disk, what does without data > slices > mean? If its got a label, how do you define what that means? > This can be more clearly described than it is currently in the spec. Without data slices can mean that the VTOC is uninitialized or perhaps initialized, but all slices are of zero length. Label should probably be removed from the spec, since it is not necessary for a disk to have a label, but there is an existing defect (6260) that is of concern, so labeling is mentioned here. > 5.1.2.1 I read the qualifiers as adding disks to the list of valid > targets. What about > using a qualifier to remove a device from the list? > This was mentioned in a discussion, but did not make it into the functional spec. It seems a reasonable and useful idea and should be mentioned. > 5.3.2 Typo area should be are. There's no such thing as raid2. > Thanks - raidz, raidz1, raidz2 > 5.3.2 If only file systems are managed, how are swap and dump managed? > Currently, AI provides swap and dump definitions that should suffice. There is currently no plan for managing them through AI. Are you proposing that the user should be able to manage them through AI? Thanks for your help, William
