Dermot McCluskey writes: > That's exactly what I started doing. But after over 100 lines of > awk, I realised there were lots of scenarios I still wasn't taking > care of in the install CAS, and I hadn't even started looking at > the remove script yet. So yes, it is reasonably complicated.
I see. > I think SMF provides a much more suitable way to update > these files. Is there a general policy or desire to avoid > proliferation of SMF services? It's a bit icky. It's somewhat akin to self-modifying behavior, in that the installed software goes through some sort of lengthy "rebuild" after the first boot. There are a number of issues with that, including how it works with diskless configurations (it probably just doesn't) and what happens with packages that can be added and removed on the fly. We have other examples of this (such as fc-cache), so I'd say it's not impossible, but I'm also not sure that it's something I'd like to see become commonplace. (Perhaps fc-cache, with its frequent core drops and scary upgrade behavior is an extreme example ...) -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
