On 9/25/07, Darren Reed <Darren.Reed at sun.com> wrote:
> Stephen Hahn wrote:
>
> >* Peter Tribble <peter.tribble at gmail.com> [2007-09-15 15:31]:
...
> >>What we need is the counterpart that changes the permanent state of the
> >>service without affecting the current state. Maybe enable/disable -p?
> >>
> >>My expectation is that this would require the same level of permission
> >>as a regular enable/disable.
> >
> > That sounds pretty reasonable as an RFE to me. The various
> > smf_{disable,enable}_instance(3SCF) interfaces currently take
> > SMF_TEMPORARY, with persistent being the default. Movement into
> > maintenance has the addition of SMF_IMMEDIATE. SMF_POSTPONED or
> > SMF_DEFERRED, maybe?
>
> What would the interaction be between the new flag and
> "svcadm refresh"?
>
> And more to the point, Peter, what is the desired interaction?
I don't think there are any interactions. The new flag doesn't introduce
any new states; it just allows an extra path between states.
--
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
