Bart Smaalders wrote: > Enda O'Connor wrote: >> Dennis Clarke wrote: >>>> Enda O'Connor wrote: >>>> >>>>> Bart Smaalders wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Enda O'Connor ( Sun Micro Systems Ireland) wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>> How does IPS rid itself of the various scripts ( postinstall say >>>>>>> ) that >>>>>>> SVR4 uses to provision your system post pkgadd, ie say add_drv >>>>>>> or so on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> We've just started along this path. We're basically breaking tasks >>>>>> performed in post-install scripts into two bunches: those that need >>>>>> to happen before boot/during install, and those that can wait after >>>>>> restart (whether service or OS). The tasks that are done >>>>>> immediately >>>>>> are called actions. Right now we have file, directory, link, >>>>>> hardlink, >>>>>> license, and driver actions. The latter action takes care of >>>>>> calling >>>>>> add_drv/update_drv as needed, for example. >>>>>> >>>>>> There will be more actions; clearly ones to take care of the *attr >>>>>> files, creating users/groups, etc are needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> We're also going to provide standard mechanisms to handle >>>>>> post-restart >>>>>> services; these are likely to be more flexible than the actions and >>>>>> are easier for everyone to code, since they only have to handle a >>>>>> single run-time context. >>>>>> >>>>>> One of the great benefits of eliminating scripting is that we can >>>>>> validate the behavior of the actions on zones; it should be >>>>>> possible to update disabled zones or cloned zone filesystems w/o >>>>>> security issues that require the use of scratch zones today. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Bart >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Hi Bart/Stephen >>>>> sounds interesting, what would the post restart service depend on >>>>> etc ( >>>>> ie filesystem/local ), and who would you see writing them, package >>>>> developers? >>>>> >>>> Well, it seems as if this might be handled by adding config methods >>>> to the services smf scripts; the config methods would run when the >>>> service's dependencies are satisfied. Stephen has done a lot more >>>> thinking on this, I'm sure. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I spend a lot of time sitting on the sidelines and I don't say much. >>> Mostly >>> because I fear that I don't fully understand the problem.[1] One of the >>> things that crossed my mind was the slow migration that we have >>> already seen >>> from the old SVR4 init scripts to the SMF infrastructure. I have my DNS >>> servers run this way with hand crafted SMF scripts on Solaris 10. >>> It seems >>> very reasonable to me that any future package system would extend this >>> thinking towards package install both pre and post. >>> >>> So, as verbosely as possible, I am simply saying that I like the >>> idea but I >>> don't see *how* you are going to handle the actions that need to be >>> taken. >>> >>> - >>> Dennis Clarke >>> >>> [1] I sync with the pkg code tree regularly and I have built it on >>> S10 with >>> the addition of Python 2.5.1 from Blastwave. I have even taken a >>> crack at a >>> build on Solaris 8 where libmd raises an issue. But I don't have a >>> solid >>> grasp on all the issues yet. >>> >>> >>> >> Hi Bart/Stephen >> Yes, I like the idea as well, but I suspect it might be harder than >> anticipated. But that only my intuition, no hard data there. >> Some of the things I have seen over the years in package scripts can >> be bizarre to say the least. >> >> With some direction I'd be happy to have a crack at helping out here >> in any capacity you say fit. >> >> Enda > > Excellent! Grab a clone of the pkg gate, take a look at the list of > bugs and have at it... there's really _no_ shortage of work :-). > > - Bart > > will do ( stupid question, where do I find these bugs ( ie is there some interface somewhere to interact with ))
Enda _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
