> I went through the suggested fix in the bug report, and generally that > was the approach I had been considering as well. In addition to making > this private (we can quibble about naming later), I'd also do an > explicit check to see if we're operating without SVCCFG_REPOSITORY set, > and fail plus issue a message saying that svcadm refresh is the droid > you're looking for. > > (I think that's the correct mechanism for avoiding the weird situation > where the running service has been refreshed, but the restarter and the > service itself hasn't yet been notified -- but I'm open to other > suggestions too.) > > That can all wait, though, until it's been confirmed that this does > actually solve both problems.
It's confirmed: it solves both problems (!) So, now the logistics: do we think we can find a way to get this ARC'd and putback in build 82 (which just opened today)? (UV is currently targeting the start of build 83.) > Alan, you rock! Indeed! -- meem
