> We're talking about _user_ images in this thread.  Near as I can tell
> the problem with _user_ images is the lack of an SMF action equivalent.
> 
> If that's so, then why are we not talking about correcting that
> deficiency instead of talking about adding install-time scripting to
> IPS?????

That's a fascinating question.

Both Bart and I took a look at the initial proposal, and said something
to the effect of, "this implies that there's a need for a user-image
service framework."

http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2009-February/011105.html
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2009-February/011107.html

Those who put forth the proposal read this and replied, "no we're not
going to build a service framework for user images."

The response, as you read, was that arbitrary scripting is unacceptable,
there has to be some kind of structure.

I can't speculate as to why they can't be bothered to build a SMF
equivalent mechanism for user images, but they've repeatedly rejected
the suggestion.

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

Reply via email to