* Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at sun.com> [2008-03-07 23:39]: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 03:19:20PM -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > > I had thought that the reason we treat all new configuration files > > > (/etc/dladm/*) as Private was that they're just a temporary expediency > > > until they can be redesigned into SMF. Is that not the case? > > > > It is the case (and your summary is accurate). System software > > designed by and for OpenSolaris should use SMF for its configuration > > store. We do not force application or layered system service > > configuration into SMF, although we think there's value in the latter. > > System services that originate elsewhere and are ported to OpenSolaris > > consolidations are the tricky ones, where only a configuration subset > > may get moved, or the entire configuration, or merely > > enabled/disabled... > > So, is this an oblique endorsement of temporary instances? (Since > that's what James evidently thinks is needed to get bridging to use > SMF.)
I would certainly be interested in an investigation of temporary instances. There are lots of new edge cases to identify, work through, and allow or disallow. It's not a "oh yeah, just add those" decision. - Stephen -- sch at sun.com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
