Quoth Peter Tribble on Fri, May 30, 2008 at 08:06:39AM +0100: > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:19 AM, Liane Praza <liane.praza at sun.com> wrote: > > We're seriously considering changing the behaviour of r.manifest when it > > is invoked on an enabled (and running) service to simply do "svcadm > > disable -s; svccfg delete", rather than failing with an error and > > forcing the administrator to type svcadm disable before removing the > > package. > > Absolutely, I'm all in favour.
Allow me to play devil's advocate: Do you think it's possible that an unsophisticated administrator will not understand the relationship between the package he's removing and the services it delivers, and would later regret the implicit disable & delete? David
