2008/159 svcs -xq

[Ceri Davies]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 01:55:28PM -0600, Mark Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 01:28:03PM -0500, Mark Martin wrote:
> >
> > >  EXIT STATUS
> > > +
> > > +     3    Services exist in problematic state.
> > >
> > > Ceri, as to your point about (service_degraded == all_is_well), that's
> > out
> > > of scope for this case.  I'll file a bug for svcs -x showing degraded
> > state
> > > and we can hash that at a later date.
> >
> > That suits me OK, although I'm still not really happy with the
> > implication, particularly in the EXIT STATUS section above, that
> > "problematic" wouldn't include 'degraded'.  What the exit status really
> > indicates is that services that should be 'online' are presently either
> > in maintenance, waiting for a dependency to come online (?)  or, if
> > you're very quick, possibly uninitialised.  I'd prefer that be made
> > explicit since I definitely would parse that statement as including
> > 'degraded'.
> >
> 
>   EXIT STATUS
>   +
>   +     3    Services exist which are in the maintenance state or
>   +            are blocking other enabled services
> 
> 'zat ok?

It is with me, thanks again!

> > I'd be equally happy for svcs to grow a -X option for including degraded
> > services which should be reasonably interface safe, rather than
> > extending svcs -x and possibly breaking stuff.
> >
> 
> Bug submitted.  I'll follow up with a bug id after it makes the rounds to
> the outside.

Cool.

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
                                                  -- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/attachments/20080311/1aac5ba3/attachment.bin>