David Powell wrote: >> What I would like would be a way to declare a property to be "hidden", >> so that by default it isn't shown by any of the user interfaces. If it's >> set to a non-default value, then it should be shown. >> >> Thoughts? > > See smf_template(5). In particular, the section on "Property > visibility".
Thanks. Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking of. Now if only svcprop and svccfg listprop respected it... >> At the same time, I'd also like it if properties that are declared in >> the manifest could not be deleted with svccfg delprop, so that it's not >> possible for a user to destroy a property declaration. That would in >> turn mean that the software could rely on the presence of the property >> and not have to handle the question of what to do if the property isn't >> present. >> >> Thoughts? > > Templates also let you specify that certain properties or property > groups are required. I think the only time we implicitly validate > services against their templates is when they are imported. One > interesting possibility might be for the restarter to perform a > validation when refreshing a service, and to proactively put > non-conforming services in maintenance. Does an svccfg delprop against a "required" property fail? That's the primary thing I would be looking for, so that an admin can't break the system by deleting the property.
