2008/015 svccfg refresh subcommand

[Liane Praza]

Jeremy Harris wrote:
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
>> I like the refresh/restart split.
>>
>> Refresh implies that running service state/config can be updated without
>> disruption.  Restart implies that processes will exit/be killed and be
>> restarted.  The distinction makes a difference in terms of reliability.
> 
> It sounds like it behaves much as a "service foo reload" in RedHat.
> Was any thought given to using the same word for the subcommand?
> Is it too late to change?  Or accept a synonym?

The original verbs were finalized in 2003, so we weren't planning on 
changing them as part of this case. :)  I don't think diverging to 
conform with RedHat rather than our other existing commands, methods, 
and library interfaces is a good idea.  (But don't think that's what you 
were suggesting either.)

As to synonyms -- it's always possible, but would probably be a separate 
case, as the verbs appear in a number of places and it'd be good to do 
an evaluation of how similar they really are, whether there are others 
in the RedHat command set which are also worth aliasing, and whether 
there are any other OSes it'd be good to bridge the gap with. (This is 
one area pretty much every OS and big distro has their own system and 
command set for these days.) If I was on ARC, I probably wouldn't accept 
one synonym without an evaluation of why the full synonym set wasn't 
being explored.

I'm not personally inclined to drive such an effort, as I'm not sure 
there's huge benefit in differently named (and probably subtly 
differently behaving) commands having matching verbs/subcommands. 
However, you might find people who agree that this is important enough 
to contribute to making it happen either on smf-discuss or 
sysadmin-discuss if you do want to explore it further.

liane