Quoth James Carlson on Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 07:34:31AM -0400: > It's unclear to me which of these two things (package and service > names) is really intended to be the primary administrative unit. > > The text above seems to be written as though the package name is that > unit: we'd want to ask "what service is (or services are) damaged if > this package is removed?" > > Wouldn't it be somewhat more consistent to deal just in FMRIs, since > that's how the rest of the system is managed? That is, I'd like to be > able to say "please remove svc:/network/foobar and whatever horse it > rode in on," rather than trying to divine sets of package names by > looking at services. Better still, I'd like to install by service > name.
Yeah, that would be pretty sweet. How do you think that work should be prioritized? Do you know whether any of our competitors already allow it? Until it's done, though, and until all I/O behavior can be described by SMF services, I suspect software management (packaging) can't be expressed in terms of service management. David
