Joe Di Pol wrote:
> This RFE is critical to our upcoming Update Center release.
> Tom Mueller and I are investigating possible solutions for this,
> and Tom has updated the bug with some considerations and options.
> We'd like to get feedback on the proposal.
> 
> See Comment 5 on:
> 
> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=2340
> 
> Our inclination is to go with Option (d):
> 
> d) Store disabled authorities in another file, such as cfg_cache_inactive.
> 
> The benefit to this option is that disabled authorities would be
> completely ignored by older code. This is important for our use of IPS
> where we can have situations where an older version of IPS is operating
> on newer user images.

Having another cfg_cache doesn't seem compatible with our future 
intended usages (see docs/image.txt in the gate) or it's naming.

So, I personally would rather see us go with Option (c).  If we go with 
Option (d) the file should not be called cfg_cache_inactive; it needs to 
be named something else since cfg_cache has a very specific meaning.

Cheers,
-- 
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to