On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:06:43AM -0500, Florin Iucha wrote:
> 
> I know. So, are there any plans to add "uncommon" per class
> configuration to CKRM/RCFS? Is there a strong opposition against
> adding them?

Of the top of my head, I do not see any problem with it. We can have
an attribute file, which has class attributes. It will improve the
flexibility.

Patch welcome ;)
> 
> > >As I was trying to work around this problem, I attempted to use the
> > >class name to infer what the classified function should be (three
> > >classes is good enough of a test, for starters) - but I have
> > >discovered that the class name contains the mount point and the class
> > >type: /rcfs/taskclass/foo/bar, when I was really expecting only the 
> > >significant part of the path "foo/bar", since the mountpoint can be
> > >anywhere and the class type can be obtained by other means. Is this
> > >deliberate, or it just happened and nobody had a reason to change it?
> > 
> > The reason for using a fully qualified path serves to uniquely identify 
> > a class. Admittedly, the mount point isn't necessary, but the classtype is.
> > 
> > Why is the presence of a common prefix (the mount point) a problem for 
> > the classification function you're writing ?
> 
> It is not a problem, it just looks inelegant. Stripping one or two path
> elements make no difference...
> 
> florin
> 
> -- 
> 
> Don't question authority: they don't know either!



-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chandra Seetharaman               | Be careful what you choose....
              - [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |      .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
ckrm-tech mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech

Reply via email to