On 23/06/2010 17:25, John Fischer wrote:
I understand that this change will break some scripts that admins
or developers have. However, as someone has already pointed out
the decision to move this direction was made in the original greenline
case. We are simply executing on one aspect of that strategy.
You are but there are is also precedence in other cases where data has
been moved from a file in /etc to SMF. In some of those other cases the
approach was taken to load the data in the /etc file(s) into SMF.
Could this case possibly do that type of thing ?
On 06/22/10 02:29 PM, Peter Tribble wrote:
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 9:25 PM, James
Carlson<carls...@workingcode.com> wrote:
On 6/19/10 6:52 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote:
3. Obsolete file /etc/nodename. This file will no longer exist in
the system
This will break 1000s of LOC of scripts. I am sure you have
considered the consequences your customers will be facing, and
have decided that your gain outweighs their loss...
Really? I can't say I've ever seen a script that reads /etc/nodename in
preference to using "uname -n" output, nor can I find any. Providing a
pointer to one would probably help focus the discussion.
I had several admin scripts that I wrote, nothing major. I would prefer
to use `uname -n`, but after about the third time that I found a system
thinking it was called --fqdn I started to mistrust uname -n, as it
can be
accidentally set to something other than the real name of the system
by incautious admins or applications, and looked at /etc/nodename as
a more reliable source of what the hostname was *supposed* to be.
--
Darren J Moffat
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-arc mailing list
opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org
