On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 23:05, Philip Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 10:50:31PM +0200, rupert THURNER wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 22:39, Peter Bonivart <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:17 PM, rupert THURNER <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> we would need to make a request. as we have 1000 machines, and only a >> >> few of them run opencsw it would be denied. >> > >> > Why would it be denied? It's not like it would hurt the machines not >> > using CSW, it's something like a 20 KB package containing 10 files >> > which has to be specifically called to do anything. >> > >> >> because all machines look the same on the base layer. and upgrading >> all machines is a major thing. and waiting for the next operating >> system release as well (because it takes so much time). >> >> it was already difficult to get the /opt/csw mountpoint. >> >> but i'll try :) >> > > If it's a "these things change only once a year, if you're LUCKY" thing... > then it would almost be worse to be stuck with an older version of the > thing. > your requested change should be more along the lines of "please install a > symlink to point to /etc/csw/[somehackplace]" so that you can deploy > updates to the class utils in a timely fashion.
will do. but will this be sufficient, as the error was: /etc/opt/csw/init.d/csw.smf.sample ... pkgadd.ORG: ERROR: unable to open </usr/sadm/install/scripts/i.cswcpsampleconf> for writing: (30) Read-only file system or this was more the kind of follow-up error? > > But i think you'll probably be best off trying my "treat as read-only > /opt/csw nfs share" approach. here every machine is installed separately, but this is quite automated. i am not aware that we use nfs. currently we install in a writable area, and then mount into /opt/csw as stated in your description. which works very good. rupert. _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
