Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Ben Rockwood <benr at cuddletech.com> [2007-09-18 11:11]: > >> I'm curious if its possible (speaking in terms of XML semantics) to >> allow an element to defined for a service and then over-riden by a >> later instance. >> >> An example would be to define a method_context within the service >> element, then to create multiple instance, only one of which uses a >> different method_context which would be defined within the instance >> element to effectively "over-ride" the (for lack of a better term) >> global definition. >> >> Based on my testing, as it stands now, anything that will differ >> between instances must be defined within each instance locally and not >> "shared" globally for the service. >> > > Really? You can't get svccfg(1M) to import something like > > <service> > <method> method definition 1 </method> > <instance> > </instance> > <instance> > <method> method definition 2 </method> > </instance> > </service> > > in a single manifest at present? What's the error message? >
There is no error message. My testing was specifically with method_context, not exec_method. So in my testing the "global" definition would always be used. >> Being able to do this seems more intuitive to me, but maybe isn't good >> style. I'm not sure. Just an idea. >> > > I agree. I know there's an issue with instances of the same service > across multiple manifests (can't do it at present), but I had thought > the single manifest case would work. > I can supply full test cases if you'd like. benr.
