On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 08:20:18AM -0600, Susan Kamm-Worrell wrote:
>  On 06/ 1/11 02:33 AM, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
> >On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:55:03PM -0600, Susan Kamm-Worrell wrote:
> >>
> >>Ed,
> >>
> >>Thanks for the review.
> >>
> >>Responses below.
> >>
> >>Susan
> >>
> >>
> >>On 05/31/11 07:08 PM, Edward Pilatowicz wrote:
> >>>[ resend after dropping lots of quoted command output ]
> >>>
> >>>- in clone, it seems weird that we're adding arguments after the
> >>>   zonename, it seems like all arguments should come before the zonename.
> >>For the rest of the commands the brand-specific-options come after all the
> >>common command arguments.  I arc'd the extension of clone with that
> >can you provide some examples?  i thought that brand options can be
> >intermixed with zoneadm options, and zoneadm will just pass unknown
> >options onto the brand callback.
> >
> >>thought in mind:
> >>(ipkg)
> >>clone [-m copy] [-s zfs_snapshot] source_zone [-c sc_profile.xml | dir]
> >>
> >>(s10)
> >>clone [-m copy] [-s zfs_snapshot] source_zone [-c sysidcfg]
> >>
> >>
> >well, cli processing in general looks like:
> >
> >     <command>  <options>  <arguments>
> >
> >i really really really don't like the idea of supporting:
> >
> >     <command>  <options>  <arguments>  <brand options>
> >
> >aside from being a bad idea in general, doing this will prevent us from
> >ever being able to add another argument to the clone subcommand.
> >
> >wrt arc, i'm sorry i missed this.  but we can fix this with a quick
> >email to the case alias.  also, if you think that fixing this will put
> >you at risk of missing this build then i'd say we just drop the clone
> >changes from this wad, update the arc case, and deliver the clone
> >changes next build.  (i doubt AI depends on these clone changes.)
>
> I guess this was just my interpretation from the zoneadm manapage:
>   zoneadm -z zonename [-u uuid-match] subcommand [subcommand_options]
> where I understood the subcommand of clone to be 'clone clone_source'.
>

np.

really, the format for zoneadm is:

zoneadm -z <zonename> [ <options> ] subcommand [<subcommand_options>] 
[<subcommand_args>]

and putting <brand_subcommand_options> after <subcommand_args> just
doesn't seem right to me.  afaik, no subcommands distinguish between
<subcommand_options> and <brand_subcommand_options>.

> It's no problem to make this change to clone, but I was under the impression
> that all changes associated with an ARC case for a consolidation had to
> be pushed together.
>

this is generally true, so if this wasn't done it would clearly be a bug
that would need to be fixed asap.  :)

> The s10 changes already went back with this change.  Would it be possible
> to push this change, then fix it with a bug fix and updated fasttrack next 
> build?
> Then I could fix both s10 and ipkg consolidations in the same build.
>

grumble, grumble, grumble, i guess so...
please get bugs filed on the issue.

> >but i thought the -c option allows the user to specify a new sysconfig
> >profile.  i didn't think we were going to support installing old style
> >sysidconfig profiles with this same option.  do we really need to do
> >that?  why not just generate an error if -c or -m are specified and the
> >new sysconfig mechanism aren't active?  (it seems like we're delivering
> >new features for the old framework that we're about to rip out anyway.)
> The plan is for the zones test suites to start using the -c option and to
> mimic this code passing in the needed sysidcfg file if the old sysconfig 
> framework
> was in use and to use a profile for the new sysconfig framework.  This would 
> allow
> the test suites to be used by both the old and new frameworks.
>
> Once the new SC framework is in place and is working, the tests can also be 
> modified
> to remove the old sysidcfg code.
>

sigh.  supporting two frameworks is kinda confusing so i was hoping to
keep the code for the old one to a minimum.  but i understand what
you're saying, so ok.  could we get a bug filed on ripping out the
support for the old framework?

ed
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to