Brock Pytlik wrote:

> I wasn't clear to me that looking at sys.argv[0] at any place other than
> near the beginning of programming execution was safe.

It's probably safe, but perhaps grabbing client_args from the history
object would be safer.  Shawn may have a better feeling for this.

> >If I set trust-anchor-directory in a BE to /etc/trustanchors, and then
> >mount the BE at /mnt, you're saying that operating on that BE would look in
> >/etc/trustanchors and not in /mnt/etc/trustanchors.  I think that the value
> >of trust-anchor-directory, if set, should always be relative to the image
> >-- it's more properly self-contained this way.
>
> And if the trust anchor dir is set to be a nfs path?  That said, if
> that's what's preferred, I'll shift to that approach.
> 
> An alternative suggestion. If the path provided starts with /, it's
> treated as absolute, if doesn't it's treated as relative.

I don't think anyone would remember to use the relative form, which is
highly likely to be the default case.

I suppose you could check the path inside the image and if that doesn't
exist, then outside the image, but I think the former is the intuitive and
correct (if only the first) choice.

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

Reply via email to