James Carlson wrote:
> Jerry Jelinek writes:
>>> This document describes in detail how the packaging bits will be taken
>>> care of.  But how are patches re-run to update the zone on attach?  We
>>> don't have copies of the patch metadata (the scripts) around in usable
>>> form, do we?  Do we just 'assume' that those patches never do anything
>>> useful to any non-global zone?
>> The patch bits are handled in the same way that they are currently handled
>> for a freshly installed zone.  That is, those changes are already merged
>> into the bits as well as the spooled pkg data that we have in the global
>> zone.
> 
> Yep; I know.  I was asking more about the patch-related scripting.
> 
>>  When we install a new zone the bits from the global zone are copied
>> into the zone and the spooled pkg is used to update the editable
>> and volatile files as well as the metadata for the pkg that is stored in
>> the zone.
> 
> This is actually a different case.  With the usual patch install
> scenario, one may need to worry about the zones on the system today
> and the zones that are yet to be installed in the future.  This
> project introduces a new case: new un-upgraded zones may now show up
> in the future, long after the patch scripts have run.
> 
> I think the assumption needs to be that we'll just never have a patch
> script that needs to muck about in existing zones.  Right?

James,

OK, sorry for misunderstanding your point.  Actually, I think the
assumption is different.  I think the assumption is that patching
leaves the bits and spooled pkgs on the system in a state that is
suitable for installing the pkg into a zone.  And, what is a new use
case now, is that this has to apply not only to fresh zones, but to
zones that have been previously installed.

However, I am not sure this is really anything new.  When we are upgrading
a system from one Solaris update to the next, I believe the pkgs we are
installing are in this state.  That is, a Solaris upgrade from one update
to the next does not install the patches as a separate step, it expects
the pkgs to be pre-patched.  Is that your understanding as well?  So maybe
there could be an issue if we had a patch that was not suitable for use in
a Solaris update but that was issued asynchronously?  I will add some material 
explaining this assumption to the proposal.

Thanks,
Jerry

Reply via email to