>>> >>> The disadvantage of this approach is that whenever new Sysconfig >>> parameter >>> would be introduced, installer would need to be modified accordingly - >>> at least new entry added to the dictionary which would serve to >>> transform >>> particular Sysconfig parameter to SMF profile. >> >> This was also a disadvantage with sysidtool(1M), which is what steered >> us to look at a more extensible approach. > > I see. I was not aware of how much extensibility is important. If > it is high priority requirement, I agree that we should use SMF > profiles directly as Sysconfig API. >
Extensibility is a high-order requirement, my apologies if I didn't make that clear in our earlier discussions. I suspect that the context in which you picked this up didn't help, since the documents written so far were focused on a basic set of parameters that are part of the installer requirements. Dave
