As the person looking to integrate this FOSS in a reasonable time frame, I would prefer not to add any IPS dependencies to this case.
The [optional] SMF manifest, and resulting user/group were written as an administrative convenience for the expected administrator. The manifest and resulting issue could be removed, if PSARC desires... Or other... Doug. Glenn Skinner wrote: > Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:52:07 -0500 > From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at sun.com> > Subject: Re: 2008/507 [ OpenLDAP for OpenSolaris] > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:22:19PM -0500, Nicolas Williams wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 03:16:39PM -0700, Glenn Skinner wrote: > > > > Is it really necessary to allocate another user:group pair > > > from our dwindling stock of reserved values? Would it be > > > possible to share one of the already allocated entries from > > > the reserved part of the name space? > > > > My impression (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that with IPS > > the UIDs and GIDs can be allocated dynamically and that most > > pkgs that install local users/groups will often not be installed > > by the user anyways. > > I've confirmed this with Dave Miner. > > Are you proposing a dependency of this case on the IPS case? > > -- Glenn >
