Christine Tran wrote: >> >> It would be really nice to add a flag be added to a dependency to say >> "hey, >> if serviceA is disabled, then that's ok, I (serviceB) want to be >> disabled too" >> rather than "hey, if serviceA is disabled, something bad has gone >> wrong and >> I (serviceB) can't start". RFE? > > What's functionally wrong with this method? offline is functionally > the same as disabled, OK except for the annoying message when you do > svcs -x. When serviceA is restarted, its offlined dependents restart.
Unfortunately, that's exactly why CR 5100134 was created, and is a showstopper. Users are alarmed when they see that the service is in an offline state because it has a dependency on a service which by default is disabled.
