I suggest you join the gentoo-dev list and float that...

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 22:31 -0800, John Myers wrote:
> I am looking for a way to make a contribution to Gentoo and open source in 
> general. So I'm thinking to myself, "I'm a programmer, why don't I write 
> something?" So here I am. I, however, want to get opinions from other Gentoo 
> users before I embark on this quest.
> 
> I'm not asking for volunteers or contributions or anything, just comments on 
> my idea. If everyone else thinks it's a stupid idea, I won't pursue it.
> 
> Here it is:
>  So I'm emerging some package, watching the endless stream of compiler 
> commandlines scroll across my screen, when I realize, "I really don't care 
> about these command lines all that much. I do, however, really wish that I 
> could find out how far in this build I am." So I do a little thinking, and 
> this is what I came up with:
> 
> eprogress - a general-purpose hierarchical progress reporting system
> 
> my vision of the architecture has three components:
> 
> 1) eprogress progress providers (clients?) (perhaps through some sort of 
> libeprogressc). These are programs like emerge, make, gcc, etc. which have 
> some sort of goal, and can report on their progress. They would need to be 
> patched to provide the system with the progress information.
> 
> 2) eprogressd (one for each master task, i.e. if you had an emerge and some 
> other make running at the same time, they would be kept separated). the 
> eprogressd would run in the background and keep track of all the progress 
> data.
> 
> 3) eprogress viewers which communicate with eprogressd to display a 
> representation of the progress data. There could be any number of 
> interchangeable viewers, some for console, some for X11. Some may be 
> specialized to a particular task (such as a special one for emerges), but all 
> would use the same protocol to talk to the eprogressd, which would be kept 
> generic (there could (should?) be some sort of libeprogressviewer to help 
> with this)
> 
> I would suggest that the system should use UNIX domain sockets or TCP/IP 
> sockets for the communication, especially TCP/IP for the viewer connection. 
> It should not be necessary for the viewer to reside on the same machine as 
> the daemon. Nor, for that matter, should it be necessary for individual tasks 
> to be performed on the same machine.
> 
> Also, progress information does not have to be limited to a percentage 
> (though 
> that is required). The information could contain many things, like compiler 
> command lines, warnings, errors, einfos etc.
> 
> Please let me know what you think.
-- 
Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to