Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 09:58:56AM +0100, Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote: >> >>> So you'd want a new mechanism for this? (I'd suggest we do something >>> similar for configuration file dependencies). >> Config file deps is a completely different case. The service is misconfigured >> and should show up. > > > I'm not sure I agree from a Solaris development perspective, though our > defaults are now not to run services, in some cases it is nice to > define a service as magically depending on a configuration file.
A good example would be Apache. Given that the SMF service for Apache is disabled by default it would be nice if we could now ship /etc/apache2/http.conf rather than http.conf.example. The example file isn't perfect but it is good enough to run a simple server. -- Darren J Moffat
