On 8/5/09, Dan Price <dp at eng.sun.com> wrote: > On Wed 05 Aug 2009 at 02:27PM, Darren J Moffat wrote: > > Martin Bochnig wrote: > > >On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Alexander Eremin<eremin at milax.org> > wrote: > > >>Also we can divided these scripts for x86/64 and sparc versions - now > > >>all stuff on one > > > > > > > > >Doing this for entire ramdisk images (IA32 vs. AMD64 and sun4u vs. > > >sun4v) is certainly a good idea, as we discussed before. > > >But for scripts it would be against the design of Solaris / SVR4 / > > >POSIX / everything good. > > > > I don't agree. The scripts that Roland is talking about are ones > > delivered as part of the operating system. The fact that they are a > > script is an implementation detail that the end user or admin is not > > supposed to know about or care about and more importantly they aren't > > supposed to take advantage of it either. > > > > "No user serviceable parts inside" > > > Sure, but the parts need to be *vendor* serviceable. Please, it's > hard enought to debug things as it stands now. Let's not make it that > much harder. -1 from me.
The compiled scripts remain scripts. Why do you think it will become harder to debug them? > > > Providing that shcomp can guarantee 100% compatibility of execution I > > see no reason not to use it for core system things like /lib/svc/method > > if it can save us space and improve execution time. > > > This seems like premature optimization. Why should this be an premature optimization? 'cos you're not able to understand the concept or because its new technology? -- Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt
