On 09/ 8/10 03:24 PM, Alok Aggarwal wrote:
The DC manifests for the various x86 media types currently
have a section for boot_archive_contents that defines
what gets included in the x86 boot_archive.
Each of these manifests (slim_cd_x86.xml, all_lang_slim_cd_x86.xml,
text_mode_x86.xml and ai_x86_image.xml) has a such a section.
The contents of this section are more or less the same across
these manifests[1].
The reason we had it this way before was because the content of
the boot_archive section must be a subset of content delivered
by packages in the "packages-to-install" section. Since we expect
users to modify the list of packages for their images, we thought it
would be easy to have the root archive list in the file too, so they can
modify the
root archive content as they add or remove packages.
Over the last few years, we observed that this root archive list is
actually pretty consistent between the different image types.
As we're re-writing DC[2], it make sense to re-evaluate whether
the boot_archive_contents can be factored out into a common file
that can then be referenced in each of the various manifests.
The advantages of factoring out the boot_archive_contents would be:
a) It would make the management of the boot_archive contents much
easier across the various media types. Any time there's a change
to the contents, it can be done in a single place instead of
in every manifest.
b) The boot_archive_contents is likely to not be touched by the
users of DC in 80% of the cases. Extracting out the boot_archive
contents list like this just helps readability of the manifest
for those 80% of the users.
One way of doing it would be to have another software_data 'type' -
say, FILEPATH. The section of the manifest would look like:
<software_data action="install" type="FILEPATH">
/path/to/boot_archive_contents/file
</software_data>
Transfer would just look at the 'FILEPATH' and try to transfer
everything contained within "/path/to/boot_archive_contents/file".
Factoring content of root archive out to a common file sounds like a good
idea. Your suggestion also allows the ability to adjust the "common"
list so files/directories
can still be included in/excluded from the common list as needed
by each image type.
So, +1 from me on your suggestion.
--Karen
Would there be issues wrt refactoring the manifests like this?
Alok
[1] http://cr.opensolaris.org/~aalok/slim.vs.text
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~aalok/slim.vs.ai
[2]
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+caiman/DC+to+CUD+Migration
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
