> Arrg - and that should be more secure than using a > postinstall script??? > > > Sorry, but using an SMF Service for configuring an > application makes > developing of packages more complicated and will lead > to lot of new > errors ....
I agree -- while somwhat simple for system administrators, SMF XML manifests are complex for developers. And I should know, since I wrote several manifests, and took part in the discussions of SMF's future. So using SMF in clever ways -- although doable, should not be an escape hatch just because the IPS group believes that no scripting should be allowed. The logic is fundamentally flawed: if I need to use SMF, then I need to use scripting anyway. Now, the only question is, will you make it hard or easy for the developers? Developers tend to be turned off by technology that's too complex and too hard to use. Who will you have develop in the end? Only the hardcore Solaris guys will stay with Solaris. Eveyone else will go elsewhere, where it's easier. And the biggest irony, the hardcode Solaris people like me will not want to bother; it's just easier to stick with System V packaging, or port sgi's inst(1M) and have all these issues solved, since sgi solved them ALL already. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
