Brock Pytlik wrote:
> John Rice wrote:
>> Great that looks simpler again - we'll make the changes when are back 
>> in on Tuesday, test to make sure this does what's needed for both the 
>> GUI clients and respin. If Danek hasn't found a fix for the 
>> __init__.py issues we'll revert  this file to r590.
>>
>> Bug logged to track root cause analysis of problem post 2008.11 (4116 
>> depends on this):
>> 4231:Resolve root cause for memory leak and remove workaround for 4116
>>
>> Brock you happy with this approach, as opposed to modifying the API?
>>   
> Actually, I find modifying the api cleaner than this. This just makes my 
> skin crawl personally. I'm not inherently opposed to leaving the API 
> workaround in for a while we get things fixed up. I think an API option 
> of "prefer low memory use over blazing speed" is at least a possibly 
> reasonable switch to provide. Hard coding in our pkg client name here 
> seems wrong to me on many levels. If this is what everyone else likes, 
> I'm fine with it for 2008.11, but this workaround I want out of the code 
> as soon as possible.

The client_name is already hard-coded, and as I stated, this is only 
intended as a temporary change.

I agree that it might be nice to have the api have a 
minimal-memory-usage flag.  But until we can adequately design that, I'd 
rather not change the api to do it.

-- 
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to