Hi Evan, > Hi Sarah, > > I'm a bit slow getting back to you... > No worries.. I am slow getting back to you too :-).
> 1.4 and 1.7 isn't a BE just another version of an installed instance? > I was thinking that 1.7 should be under 1.4 and that we may want to > point out that there is a requirement on beadm/libbe for validaty > chekcing for the BE. > hmm... that's interesting. Well, the way I was thinking about this is that we could have an empty BE. Without a zpool or an instance of OpenSolaris, right? Is this possible? Is it worth finding? > 1.5.c "zpool datasets" should probably be "zfs filesystems on the zpool." > I put datasets since they are called datasets. To distinguish them from the filesystems, such as UFS. > 1.6 may be the same kind of thing as 1.7? > How are they the same? Can't we have zones in a BE? So, would we want to find what zones their might be? thanks, sarah **** > 2.9 Ethan already mentioned this one... > > thanks, > -evan > > Sarah Jelinek wrote: >> Please review and provide comments by COB Wed, 6/17. >> >> thanks, >> sarah >> **** >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I have posted a set of requirements defined for the Caiman unified >>> engine. They are located at: >>> >>> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/CUD/cud_req.txt >>> >>> There are some more details that need to be added, specifically with >>> regard to observability requirements. A lot of that depends on the >>> consumers of the unified engine. Along with the error handling section. >>> >>> Please review and send comments. >>> >>> Regards, >>> sarah >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> caiman-discuss mailing list >>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> caiman-discuss mailing list >> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss >
