2007/393 converting /etc/default/{nfs,autofs} to SMF properties

[Robert Thurlow]

Glenn Skinner wrote:

> This still strikes me as an abuse of SMF, especially since the proposed
> stability level for the properties is Committed, which implies that
> they're intended to be visible directly through svcprop(1) et al (as
> opposed to being intended to be manipulated only through sharectl et
> al).  Access through svcprop ought to apply proper type checking, which
> won't occur if the types are all astring.
> 
> Given that, do you really want these properties to be Committed, or
> would Project Private be more appropriate?

Project Private was certainly intended; I don't think I listed anything
as Committed in the text.  Please consider the proposal amended as such.

> (It would be interesting to hear what the SMF team thinks about this
> choice of representation.  Have you checked with them?  It certainly
> seems like the enhanced templates project could help here.)

I have not.  Doug McCallum, have you talked about this with the SMF
team as you've worked the CIFS server SMF code?

Rob T