James Carlson wrote: > James C. McPherson writes: >> Since it is expected that arcmsr would provide attachment to a >> bootable OS target, I want to provide a buffer so that a system >> admin keen on minimisation would not inadvertently remove the >> driver supply access to their OS instance. > > That's an argument for putting the new package into SUNWCmreq, not an > argument for putting the binaries into an existing package.
Yep, I agree totally. >> I'm not particularly wedded to one or the other choices for the >> package, and I would like to canvass the opinions of the wider >> community on this issue. > > Unless there's a clear reason why *every* system, including those > without the corresponding hardware, must have this driver, I'd suggest > a separate package. I'll put it into a separate package, but request that the package be part of SUNWCmreq. Thankyou, James C. McPherson -- Senior Kernel Software Engineer, Solaris Sun Microsystems http://blogs.sun.com/jmcp http://www.jmcp.homeunix.com/blog
