I feel that simply documenting the fact that if a location is disabled it won't disable any services enabled in the enable-svc property in that location.
The more obvious way to ensure disabling of a service would be to edit alternative services an add the service to the disable-svc properties of those if it's an absolute must. None of this is ideal, but it leaves it open to being fixed properly in the future. Darren. On 09/09/2009 14:51, Anurag S. Maskey wrote: > CC'ing nwam-discuss for broader audience > > Renee Danson Sommerfeld wrote: >> As I mentioned in my comments on this bug >> (http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=11082), I'm >> concerned that the enable-svcs and disable-svcs properties are >> likely to cause confusion and inconsistent behavior for people >> who try to use them. We don't track the state of the service >> prior to activation of the location, so we don't know how to >> restore that state when the location is deactivated. >> >> Furthermore, users can get really similar functionality by >> creating ENMs that are dependent on the location. >> >> So we have a feature that's both somewhat redundant, and also >> difficult to implement in a way that will result in consistent, >> predictable behavior. That's not a good combination. >> > The portion that's missing from the ENM is the equivalent of > "svcs-disable". "svcs-enable" can be reworked by having an ENM for each > service and the ENM having a conditional activation on the location > being active. However, the services that need to be disabled when a > location is active is not straightforward. Users will have to create > script(s) with "svcadm disable" and create ENM(s) for it(them). Not a > total loss, so I am ok with removing the two "svcs-enable" and > "svcs-disable" properties. > >> I also think that in the future, as locations become more >> smf-connected, adding this functionality, and making it work >> well, will be much easier. >> > By the way, ENMs also have this problem. If a service is already active > before an ENM containing that service is enabled, then that service is > disabled when the ENM is disabled. > > I am getting confused now and am wondering if we are talking about > removing the "fmri" property from ENM also (along with the location > properties). > > Anurag > > _______________________________________________ > nwam-discuss mailing list > nwam-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/nwam-discuss
