On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 12:01:38PM -0700, Jordan Brown wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > >That's a good question, but I do think that in.inetd-managed services > >are still very much like svc.startd-managed services -- in fact, some > >services can easily work with either restarted (e.g., ssh). So I think > >it makes plenty of sense for inetd-managed services to have "svc" FMRIs. > > Cron jobs look a lot like services that are loops with "sleep" in them. > (Sleep(1) or sleep(3), your choice :-)
I don't agree: the status of each execution of the "loop body" minus the sleep is tracked separately. > Inetd-based services are, OTOH, kind of weird that they can be "online" > with nothing running, and that they can have multiple contracts... It suffices that the port is open and the actual daemon can and will run if a client connects. > ... and that's the reason that SMF has multiple restarters, so that > there can be multiple policies for when and how things get started. I think cron jobs are sufficiently different. You might keep lots of SMF affectations (repositories, service names, instance names, property groups, properties, values, and soon, enhanced profiles and even templates), but authorization and the UIs (among other things?) will be sufficiently different to warrant a new type of FMRI. It's probably not that hard to add such a thing. I can see cron having its own svc.configd repository (with mods for doing authorization somewhat differently than SMF), for example, and a simplified API layered atop libscf; plus svcs/svccfg/svcprop-like UIs, plus Visual Panels support. > Let's not get into the CLI vs GUI discussion. I'll grant that you need > CLIs that are usable for both machine and human processing, and that > APIs need to be comprehensible to developers. Sure. Parting shot on that topic: not all text-based UIs are useful for scripting (even excluding curses-type interfaces; there are Solaris CLIs that would be good enough for scripting but for the lack of stable output). Nico --
