David Bustos writes:
> Quoth Antonello Cruz on Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 02:41:14PM -0700:
> > >>>>>> lib/libscf/common/scf_tmpl.c
> > >>>>>> 3479: Why isn't this SCF_ERROR_TEMPLATE_INVALID?
> ...
> > > Ok, sorry, I asked the wrong question.  I should have asked "Is there
> > > a way to create a property template through the manifest which has an
> > > SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE with a single empty value?"  And then I think the
> > > same decision process applies as for line 3972 above.
> >
> > David, you get an SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE if the manifest has 
> > <prop_pattern> with no type attribute.
> 
> Really?  I would think that svccfg import would only create an
> SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE property if prop_pattern *had* a type attribute.
> Otherwise, where do you put the value of the type attribute when it's
> present?

Unlike other properties, svccfg does create a property with an empty string
for SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE even if the manifest does not declare the
prop_pattern type.  I can no longer remember why I coded
SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE this way.  It is a trivial code change to make
SCF_PROPERTY_TM_TYPE act like all the other optional properties.

> 
> > The second case of SCF_ERROR_NOT_FOUND would occur only if the type was 
> > manually deleted, which may not constitute an invalid template. If a 
> > property template exists and it has no type or type is an empty string, 
> > it means that property is wildcarded and can be of any type.
> 
> Yes, I understand that you're interpreting an empty string the same way
> as the absence of the property.  I'm questioning whether that's a good
> idea or not.  I think the first piece of evidence we need is whether the
> official interfaces (svccfg import) ever create the property with an
> empty string.  If they don't, as I suspect, then we have to decide
> whether we want to be strict, or future-proof.  It seems you have chosen
> the latter, which is ok, but not what I would have chosen, I don't
> think.
> 
> 
> David
> _______________________________________________
> smf-discuss mailing list
> smf-discuss at opensolaris.org

Reply via email to