2008/5/16 Jordan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Shawn Walker wrote: >> >> * Packages cannot depend on it (meaning they *must* pre-define >> defaults for all options) > > What's the default hostname? > What's the default system private key? > What's the default HTTP proxy? > Which management server should my management proxy connect to? > ... et cetera. > > I'm all in favor of having as many good defaults as possible, but there are > some things that are essential to the operation of the software (be it > system software or application software) that need to be customized for the > local environment. Yes, they could mostly be set using the usual "control > panel" type user interfaces, but good Out-Of-Box-Experience suggests that > the user should be led through the key settings rather than being forced to > manually find them in the control panel.
When I said packages can't depend on it, I meant *users must not be forced to configure packages during installation*. I think the best thing to do here is to create a *separate* configuration tool that ties into the packaging database to track configuration state. It could operate much like SMF's "svcs" command and allow you to see "which packages are in a maintenance state, need configuration" and so forth. I personally would be horrified to see the pkg client get tied into a configuration system directly. It needs to be a separate tool. -- Shawn Walker "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
