2007/7/5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I think that's a matter of opinion:) I don't know anything about SMF but > I've just had a look at > http://www.cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=182 and it looks total > overkill for Indiana. Maybe if I was running a 32 cpu multiuser box SMF > would be great, but thats a job for Solaris not Indiana - XML manifests? > Shudder. SMF is not overkill for indiana.
it might be overkill to instantiate quite the number of SMF services that
a full-blown solaris installation does at first-boot, but SMF itself is incredibly useful. ;)
I think that a lot of people find SMF frustrating because they think it's slow due to the prohibitive number of services that Solaris and Solaris Express boot by default. Maybe we should try to keep as less as possible services for Indiana? Does that makes sense? you *can* have too much of a good thing, but I don't think SMF is that.
you get used to it very quickly - it is very nice to work on, as well, when you find that you need to deploy a new service of some kind....
I agree, beside the XML thing, I think that SMF is very useful and yet more powerful that other options. (I've been using it only on the latest 3 months). it isn't rocket science, just not familiar to everyone.
--e _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
-- Un saludo, Alberto Ruiz
_______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
