On 11/ 9/10 09:53 PM, Jack Schwartz wrote: > Hi Darren. > > Here are a couple of follow-ups. Resolved items are removed. > > Looking forward to seeing the revised document... >>> Page 10, end of section 3.3.1.3: Is another bullet for "other tags >>> handled by checkpoints" appropriate here? >> I'm not sure I want to list all the tags that other checkpoints handle - this >> should really be part of their design. I only included the DDU tags because >> they >> are unique to AI, and we will be creating the new checkpoint as part of this >> project. >> > I agree listing all tags that other checkpoints handle is not > appropriate. I was asking for something else; but when I look at it > now, it looks OK.
OK >> >>> Page 14, middle: Under the "Expected, but not yet planned" section: I >>> don't understand what "Adding of entries for sysidtool and sys-unconfig >>> to run all known external applications" means and pertains to. Can you >>> please explain? >> Honestly, I don't know - this is just a reference to the existing ICT in >> usr/src/lib/libict_pymod/ict.py, which : >> >> creates /etc/.sysidconfig.apps >> touches /etc/.UNCONFIGURED >> copy .sysIDtool.state to the target >> >> I don't know why this is necessary. > OK. The comment probably makes more sense within the ICT file / > context. Without that context in the AI->CUD document, the comment > doesn't make as much sense. To this end, I suggest changing the comment > to something like: > > "Adding of entries for sysidtool and sys-unconfig to set up the system." > > This seems specific enough to get the idea across while being general > enough to fit the context of this document. What do you think? Yes, I think that sounds better. Thanks, Darren. _______________________________________________ caiman-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss
