Hi,

Al Hopper p????e v ne 16. 09. 2007 v 12:42 -0500:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
> 
> > On 16/09/2007, Paul Armstrong <sunsolve at otoh.org> wrote:
> >>> Mike Gerdts wrote:
> >>>> On 9/13/07, Danek Duvall <danek.duvall at sun.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> In most cases, these sorts of actions can be
> >>> postponed until either the
> >>> service is started (for a simple case) or the machine
> >>> is rebooted.  Very
> >>> few third-party packages should need to perform
> >>> unique actions before
> >>> the machine reboots.
> >>>
> >>> The problem is that getting scripting correct is
> >>> difficult enough when
> >>> one is talking about running in a normal context.
> >>>  Getting the scripting
> >>> ight when we're modifying a local zone of a diskless
> >>> client on an
> >>> alternate architecture down-reved boot server is
> >>> downright hard since
> >>> so much of the installation environment affects the
> >>> script... we want to
> >>> defer these sorts of actions until the service
> >>> starts.
> >>
> >> It would seem to me that scripting during a service restart is no better 
> >> than a package (and possibly worse). Once you've run the script you're in 
> >> an undefined state and if a package backout occurs then you're in an even 
> >> more undefined state as there's no way of triggering script backout.
> >>
> >
> > I don't think you're in any more of an undefined state outside the
> > packaging process than during to a certain extent. If only because
> > that is the same problem that packages create now with their scripts,
> > they can do things that the packaging system by itself won't know how
> > to undo.
> >
> > That's why I think Danek's suggestion about integrating functionality
> > scripts need into the packaging system and making them use it instead
> > of being able to do their own thing is preferable.
> >
> > This might be a great case for integrating small and fast for
> > scripting that's easily "sandboxable," like Lua.
> 
> Yep - an interesting suggestion and I've already got Lua on my "to 
> try" list. The benefit of a more powerful scripting engine is that it 
> allows the developer to express the problem specific domain in 
> powerful and easily expressed/manipulated data structures - unlike 
> shell scripts.
> 

Only side note, are we sure that people will learn some special language
just to create package for opensolaris?

Best regards,

Milan


Reply via email to