On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 06:52:02PM +0200, Darren Reed wrote: > Just to clarify, the above question is asking about what's needed > at some point in the future, not now. It's asking about what's needed > for future architecture, not what can be done and is supported now. > Maybe I should have said "Will those..."
I guess opinions will vary. IMO code duplication in self-assembly advocates for new IPS action types. The most commonly edited editable files in /etc should get IPS actions even before we see such code duplication, but I bet we'd have a hard time agreeing as to what those commonly edited editable are :) For example, is /etc/services important here? I suspect the answer is "no" because apps usually have port numbers hardcoded as a fallback when the desired services(4) entry is not found, so failing to edit /etc/services on pkg install seems mostly harmless. And what about /etc/default/*? RBAC files seem to be a better candidate for new IPS actions than either of those. Self-assembly FMRI namespace pollution too seems problematic for me. Perhaps we should have a naming convention for SMF services whose only purpose is to do self-assembly -- a prefix like svc:/self-assembly/*, say. _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
