So, do you mean to say, we don't need fs-usr (and other such files) in the miniroot with this change? And with this fix, we can altogether remove them from SUNWsibi and also from miniroot. And if we apply a patch onto miniroot, that delivers these files, we will not have any problem.
But, is the service:instance: is this different for install and normal boot? If not, then again we have the problem of "sensing the environment" (to know we are in miniroot or not)! -Narendra On 10/10/06, Enda O'Connor ( Sun Micro Systems Ireland) < Enda.Oconnor at sun.com> wrote: > > Sarah Jelinek wrote: > > Enda O'Connor ( Sun Micro Systems Ireland) wrote: > > > >> Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >> > >>>> Hi > >>>> I guess setting start/exec for the service:instance in question to a > >>>> startup script other than say fs-user would do ( just in the > >>>> miniroot repository ), but again this is messy I guess. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> How is the repository build for the miniroot. > >>> > >>> If you think that that is messy, I think it's much cleaner than > >>> the current situation. > >>> > >>> Casper > >>> > >> To be honest I have no idea how the repository is built in the > >> miniroot, I don't disagree that it is probably a beter idea that we > >> have currently have ( which would not be hard ) :-) > >> > >> Would we then need to ship a dummy file to cover all the exit 0 cases, > >> or is their a better way of manipulating the svc stuff to just have > >> fs-usr not do anything, just return 0? > > > > Enda, > > > > I am not clear as to what you are proposing. Once the patches are > > applied these files get overwritten. So, we would have to modify the > > files for all of the services to know when running in the miniroot they > > should simply exit 0. That way when and if they are patched in the > > miniroot we do the right thing still. However, today there is no > > standard way that we export from the miniroot to know if you are running > > in the miniroot. Applications that need this data find ways to get this > > data. > > > > In the case of the customer issue I was dealing with it wasn't fs-usr, > > it was devices-local. > > > > sarah > > **** > > > I am assuming that say in the miniroot we had start/exec for these files > just returing 0 ( a dummy file ) in the repository DB. ( just in the > miniroot now mind ) > If we installed a patch that say delivered fs-usr to the miniroot, but > filesystem/usr start/exec was calling some dummy file, instead of > fs-usr, the patchadd should not modify that surely, ie the start/exec of > filesystem/usr:default > > Enda > >> > >> Enda > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> install-discuss mailing list > >> install-discuss at opensolaris.org > >> http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/install-discuss > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > install-discuss mailing list > install-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/install-discuss > -- Warm Regards, ??????? ??????.???.??? (S.S.Narendra Kumar) Visit my blogs at: http://ssnarendrakumar.blogspot.com/ http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/ssnkumar ___ ___ __ _ / __/ / __/ / | / / _\ \ _ \ \ / /| |/ / \___/ \___/ /_/ |__/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/install-discuss/attachments/20061010/abd785fb/attachment.html>
