> On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 13:52 -0400, JOLY, ROBERT (ROBERT) wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Rather than putting them into the launch script, it would 
> be better 
> > > to create a setup hook script with a very low sort order 
> (they are 
> > > launched in order by name).
> > > 
> > > The script will be run as root, but could create those 
> with whatever 
> > > permissions are needed.
> > 
> > Interesting - I can look into that.  Just for my own 
> curiosity, when 
> > you say better, do you mean functionally better or architecturally 
> > better?
> 
> Architecturally - it's identical functionally.  But, for 
> example, if it's a separate hook script, we can install it 
> only on platforms that use the IBM JVM.
> 
> Mostly, the startup script had at one point become a giant 
> mess of stuff that was threatening to become a serious 
> maintenance headache.  The hooks allow things to be much more modular.

I got it but on the other hand, I do not have the skills to do such a change 
quickly with a high level of confidence that RPMs, upgrades and ISO build won't 
be broken and I cannot afford the time to learn my way through this at the 
moment.  I understand your argument about the blob-effect but I do not think 
that two additional lines are going to break that 850-line-camel's back.  If 
that is okay with you, I'll quickly edit the sipxecs start-up script to get 
this blocking 4.1.7 issue off by back and open a tracker to do the clean-up.  
That clean-up activity will eventually get scheduled and assigned when time and 
resources allow for it.  Is that acceptable to you?



> 
> > > I'd like to know what that's being used for, and whether or not 
> > > there are security implications ...
> > 
> > I think I found exactly what you are looking for:
> > http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21407964
> > My guess is that its content will raise a few eyebrows.  
> I'll wait to 
> > hear from you on this before doing anything else on that subject.
> 
> I can't believe that they made the default state of this 
> facility be 'enabled'.
> 
> I'd be more comfortable also turning the thing off directly 
> in all our startup scripts (or property files, if we've 
> gotten that cleanup done).

Our startup scripts are already taken care of but I have not touched the 
openfire startup script and do not intend on changing it because of licensing 
issues.   Once they do deliver the Apache 2.0-license version of Openfire, we 
can revisit this.
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list [email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to