Please see my comments below. > Add xiao.l at sun.com into this email loop. > > On 11/04/08 22:24, Darren J Moffat wrote: >> Firstly I don't think LSARC is the appropriate ARC body to review a >> case about SCSI utilities I would have expected this to go to PSARC. >> I also don't think that this case qualifies for Self Review given the >> low level nature of the utilities and the possible impact of using them. >> >> How do these commands interact with the existing SCSI tools, >> libraries on Solaris ? Are there any risks to running these >> commands on devices managed by Solaris ? Yes, the commands are sent through the USCSICMD interface, they may either inquiry or modify the information on SCSI devices, so there may be risks I think. >> >> Do all these commands require privilege to run ? If so which >> privileges ? Is there an RBAC profile for them ? I'm not familiar with RBAC, so let me try to answer your questions. These utilities should be run as superuser(root). However for a normal user, he may also be able to run but could fail due to insufficient permission to open the device files. So the required privilege are file_dac_read and file_dac_write, the RBAC profile is "Primary Administrator", am I correct?
>> >> Shouldn't they really be in /usr/sbin rather than /usr/bin ? [ Or >> don't we care about that any more ? ] >> Either /usr/sbin/ or /usr/bin is ok to me, I would like know the advice from ARC. >> Is it really appropriate for this case to put header files into the >> already existing /usr/include/scsi/ ? Actually, these header files are only used by sg3 utilities, so it should be ok if we remove these header files. >> >> > /usr/lib/libsgutils.la >> >> I didn't think we normally included libtool libraries, in fact there >> are none currently included in /usr/lib (at least as of snv_100) but >> I did fine some in /usr/sfw/lib/ I just keep it consistent with other platform, like linux. So it's ok if we drop the libtool libraries. -Xiao >> >> -- >> Darren J Moffat >
