So you want to be able to interrupt any boot to any milestone, and instead do the patch processing if a patch is pending. You basically want to interrupt the current milestone, and instead just boot to filesystem-local and do the patching.
The question is, can the smf milestone be changed mid-milestone? My test shows that it can. How about: 1. Create patch-test-service, on which single-user depends. This will "svcadm milestone patch-install-milestone" if a patch needs to be installed. This service is always enabled. 2. Create patch-install-milestone, which depends on patch-install-service below. 3. Create patch-install service, which depends on: single-user filesystem-local This service is always enabled. It will install a patch if it is pending, otherwise, do nothing. If the service fails, it might need to: # svcadm milestone single-user So that a maintenance prompt will be appear on the console. This might not be necessary. you might get this anyway, as console-login is not reached. It should be ok to issue smf commands from an smf service, as long as they do not try to do any synchronous operations (-s). This approach is also good because an explicit boot to single user WILL NOT attempt to install pending patches. Disabling the patch-test and patch-install services will disable the automatic installation of pending patches on reboot. Thoughts? -Steve L. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 01:03:55PM -0700, Jordan Brown wrote: > Bob Netherton wrote: > > And further > > refinement would only impact patching rather than the booting process > > as a whole. > > Hmm. I don't know how to have a service that runs when a particular > milestone is selected, that *doesn't* run when "all" is selected. > (Other than by dynamically enabling and disabling it.) > > > rc scripts doing things with SMF seem a permanent solution to a > > temporary problem. In my virtual universe there are no rc scripts :) > > And then the alarm clock goes off and I return to reality. But it does > > promote rc hackery rather than fixing the problem in SMF where it > > belongs. > > Agreed. Besides, I believe that SMF is locked while rc scripts are > running, and that any attempt to manipulate it deadlocks. > > There are related schemes that could work, but the problem is getting > them properly sequenced into system startup. > > > reboot -- -m milestone=patchinstall seems elegantly simple. > > Plausible, though it doesn't exactly fit the current application usage > model. At the moment, the reboot might or might not be triggered by the > patching application. The patching application leaves the system set up > to do the patching at the next shutdown/reboot, whenever that might be. > (For SunUC-S's shutdown-time processing, it's require that that reboot > be via the "clean" mechanisms - init, shutdown - so that the processing > gets done.) > > This scheme would require either > > 1) having the patch application set the default milestone, and then > having the startup-time processing set it back, or > 2) having the patch application do the reboot. > > There's still the issue with how to keep this service from running when > you boot to "all". > > Hmm. How does single-user-mode login work? What stops it from running > on a normal boot? Is it a special case? > > --- > > BTW: I'm not in a position to commit the patch applications. I'm in > the middle here because I'm relatively familiar with all of the players > and the issues, but in my day job I'm not responsible for *any* of them. > _______________________________________________ > zones-discuss mailing list > email@example.com _______________________________________________ zones-discuss mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org