[bug-notifications] [cswclassutils 0004075]: cswinitsmf should refuse to create an FMRI with a dot in the name

[Mantis Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4075 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                maciej
Assigned To:                bonivart
====================================================================== 
Project:                    cswclassutils
Issue ID:                   4075
Category:                   other
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   minor
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     assigned
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-12-10 09:34 CET
Last Modified:              2009-12-10 23:34 CET
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    cswinitsmf should refuse to create an FMRI with a
dot in the name
Description: 
08:25 <@automaciej> I just discovered that SMF FMRIs don't work if they
have dots in them.
08:25 <@automaciej> like, you can have cswpostgres_8_4, but can't have
cswpostgres_8.4
08:29 < lewellyn> yup
08:29 < lewellyn> it's documented somewhere, in fact.
08:29 <@automaciej> cswclassutils don't catch that
08:29 < lewellyn> that's why sun's services tend to be whatever23 or
whatever_23
08:30 < Dagobert> I guess it is because SMF is designed to be extended to
multi-host at some point in the future and . is a domain-sep. Same thing as
for auto*

====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0007081) bonivart (manager) - 2009-12-10 23:34
 http://www.opencsw.org/mantis/view.php?id=4075#c7081 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Is it the service script name that can't have dots in it or is it the FMRI
path or both?

Shouldn't this be caught by GAR (checkpkg) instead? If someone packages
something in violation with Sun standards it shouldn't be released. If I
"fix" it in cswinitsmf it will lead to unpredictable results like aborting
or changing the name/path on the fly.

Better to catch it earlier.