John Levon wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:17:24AM -0400, Dave Miner wrote: > >>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johnlev/osol-xvm-vnc/ >> It would be helpful to have something in the bug outlining the design of >> the fix > > Fixed, sorry. > >> , but I'm fairly sure this is incomplete, as the set of services >> enabled on the CD is governed by a profile (generic_live.xml) delivered >> in and applied by the distro constructor. > > I don't think is necessary if the service is normally enabled? It > certainly tested OK, but maybe I'm missing something here. >
My mistake, we do apply generic_limited_net before that one, so yeah, it'll be OK. >> It would seemingly be simpler to use a dependent clause in >> vnc-config.xml, which would avoid the need to modify gdm.xml and hence >> the new import file and that change to SUNWfixes. > > I'm not convinced - this isn't the intended use of "dependent" and I > don't think it's right to (ab)use it just to avoid having a copy of > gdm.xml. It would also leave a funny setup when upgrading to a Nevada > release that includes these changes (which I do plan). > I disagree that it's not an intended use, but I don't feel strongly enough to care since you're already at this point. The only difference that results is a dependent property in the repository for your new service, which doesn't strike me as funny. >> I don't believe you should be changing 100a/slim_cluster; >> 98/i386/SUNWxvmipa also shouldn't be changed, but instead copied into >> 101 and updated. > > These changes fix a bug in 98 onwards: SUNWxvmipa is dependent on > SUNWxvmdom to work. Any release that doesn't have this fix is broken. > If you'd prefer I can leave 98-100a in the broken state, but it didn't > make sense to me to go to extra effort for this? > With that explanation I'm OK. Dave _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
