On 30 Sep 2015 9:40 am, "Martin Lucina" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, 30.09.2015 at 09:29, Justin Cormack wrote: > > On 30 September 2015 at 09:15, Martin Lucina <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Have you considered simplifying the syntax even more? If we remove > > > everything that's redundant your example from above becomes: > > > > > > === snip === > > > version 20150928 > > > > > > create hw_coolbeans "Insert coolbeans descr here" > > > assimilate hw_virtio > > > remove -lrumpkern_sysproxy > > > add /home/pooka/startmsg.o > > > === snip === > > > > > > For prior art in this space, take a look at FireHOL, a firewall generator > > > using a shell-based DSL for configuration: http://firehol.org/#firehol > > > > > > Also, how about using the more conventional "include" or "import" instead > > > of "assimilate"? > > > > I really don't see the benefit over this whole thing over a normal > > command line for linking, which everyone is familiar with. > > > > Bake is just link, users know how to link, and making a whole language > > for linking just seems over complex. > > The linker command line cannot express any of the dependencies between the > various system components. > > Without that, for example, "link in everything for running on KVM, but only > with ext2fs support" becomes an impossible task unless the user is a rump > kernel expert. This was a question I got at my Xen summit talk, so it's > definitely something people care about. > > Also, it's not like the language is particularly complex, as long as we > pick the verbs well. It should be self-evident what a config description is > doing. >
Or you could have a rumplinkconfig tool that just output the linker args. More unixy, can run standalone to work out what's going on under the hood.
