On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Justin Hibbits jr...@alumni.cwru.edu
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:32 AM, hiren panchasara
hi...@strugglingcoder.info wrote:
On 03/02/15 at 07:33P, Alfred
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Actually I want to shame third party ports into adopting libxo (or at
least providing machine readable output).
Well if upstream third party ports adopt libxo will remain to be seen.
However, one thing we can do is to make
On Tuesday, March 03, 2015 09:09:43 AM David Chisnall wrote:
Hopefully there's a lesson here that we can learn from: human-readable
formats do not make good intermediate representations when communicating
between tools.
I think this is actually an argument against libxo-ification in the one
On 04.03.2015 19:21, John Baldwin wrote:
On Tuesday, March 03, 2015 09:09:43 AM David Chisnall wrote:
Hopefully there's a lesson here that we can learn from: human-readable
formats do not make good intermediate representations when communicating
between tools.
I think this is actually an
On 3/4/15 8:21 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
On Tuesday, March 03, 2015 09:09:43 AM David Chisnall wrote:
Hopefully there's a lesson here that we can learn from: human-readable
formats do not make good intermediate representations when communicating
between tools.
I think this is actually an
On Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:35:34 AM Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/4/15 8:21 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
I would probably want
pciconf -l in that case to dump the entire PCI header (right now the
human-readable pciconf -l only dumps a subset), and I would want it to dump
fields in
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:11 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:35:34 AM Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/4/15 8:21 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
I would probably want
pciconf -l in that case to dump the entire PCI header (right now the
human-readable
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
On Mar 3, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Justin Hibbits jr...@alumni.cwru.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:32 AM, hiren panchasara
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:32 AM, hiren panchasara hi...@strugglingcoder.info
wrote:
On 03/02/15 at 07:33P, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Actually I want to shame third party ports into adopting libxo (or at least
providing machine readable output).
I know it's scary
On Mar 3, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Justin Hibbits jr...@alumni.cwru.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:32 AM, hiren panchasara hi...@strugglingcoder.info
wrote:
On 03/02/15 at 07:33P, Alfred
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:32 AM, hiren panchasara hi...@strugglingcoder.info
wrote:
On 03/02/15 at 07:33P, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Actually I want to shame third party ports into adopting libxo (or
On 2 March 2015 at 00:25, Craig Rodrigues rodr...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy
harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package
,
On 3 Mar, David Chisnall wrote:
On 3 Mar 2015, at 01:32, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
So, why you ever need to modify wc? Just load wc inside your
json/xml/etc writer, replacing its printf at the ld-elf.so level.
You can't get structured output from printf() because printf()
On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 09:09:43AM +, David Chisnall wrote:
If your argument is about binary size, then it would be relatively
easy for us to add a version of libxo for static linking into the
versions in /rescue that only supported plain-text output, but
again, please quantify your
On 03/02/15 at 07:33P, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 7:14 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:30 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On
On 3 Mar 2015, at 01:32, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
So, why you ever need to modify wc? Just load wc inside your
json/xml/etc writer, replacing its printf at the ld-elf.so level.
You can't get structured output from printf() because printf() takes
unstructured input. It's a
On 03/02/15 11:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package,
.. we can/should do both.
Just make sure the json/html/xml output is versioned, otherwise you're
going to end up with /exactly the same problems/ you have with the
current format.
-adrian
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
On 3/2/15 4:57 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
.. we can/should do both.
Just make sure the json/html/xml output is versioned, otherwise you're
going to end up with /exactly the same problems/ you have with the
current format.
+1
-Alfred
___
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not
On Mar 2, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
The responsibility is on you to provide something better, both the
architecture AND code. So if you want it backed out, then write something
better. Otherwise step back and let progress happen.
As it seems you know a
On 03.03.2015 4:45, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 03.03.2015 4:30, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM,
On Mar 2, 2015, at 7:14 PM, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:30 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Alfred Perlstein bri...@mu.org wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:57 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
.. we can/should do both.
Just make sure the json/html/xml output is versioned, otherwise you're
going to end up with /exactly the same problems/ you have with the
current format.
On 2015-03-02 19:22, Andrey Chernov wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
On 03.03.2015 3:48, Allan Jude wrote:
On 2015-03-02 19:22, Andrey Chernov wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but
On 03.03.2015 4:30, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package,
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 05:30:31PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Read the library. It doesn't care what output format it needs.
It is up to the translation layer to do it. You could even do
a csv format or most any other structured output format without
changing the userland utils.
On 3/2/15 5:30 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 03.03.2015 4:30, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On Mar 2, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Andrey Chernov a...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 02.03.2015 22:55, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15
On 1 Mar 2015, at 21:29, Rui Paulo rpa...@me.com wrote:
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org wrote:
How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core utilities (some of
which, like ifconfig, rely on kernel APIs that change between releases) to
emit structured
On 3/2/15 4:25 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
if we develop a suitable post processor with pluggable grammars, we save a lot
of work.
given enough examples you could almost have automatically generated grammars.
This decoupled
On 2 March 2015 at 04:47, Allan Jude allanj...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2015-03-01 19:20, Arseny Nasokin wrote:
On 1 March 2015 at 22:10, Allan Jude allanj...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2015-03-01 13:49, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the
On 03/02/15 01:23, David Chisnall wrote:
On 1 Mar 2015, at 21:29, Rui Paulo rpa...@me.com wrote:
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org
wrote:
How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core
utilities (some of which, like ifconfig, rely on kernel APIs
that
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:24, Harrison Grundy harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com
wrote:
It would seem like the libxo stuff runs the risk of becoming this same
API.
Why? The 'API' in the case of an libxo-ised program is a stream on stdout that
is then consumed by a JSON or XML parser. XML and
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
if we develop a suitable post processor with pluggable grammars, we save a
lot of work.
given enough examples you could almost have automatically generated grammars.
This decoupled approach is problematic. A large part of
On 3/1/15 11:10 AM, Allan Jude wrote:
On 2015-03-01 13:49, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional
utilities anyway.
(If I'm reviving a
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 09:23:55 + David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org wrote
On 1 Mar 2015, at 21:29, Rui Paulo rpa...@me.com wrote:
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org wrote:
How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core utilities (some of
which, like
On 3/2/15 5:25 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:25 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
if we develop a suitable post processor with pluggable grammars,
we save a lot of work.
given enough examples you could almost have
On 3/2/15 2:53 PM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/2/15 5:25 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:25 AM, David Chisnall wrote:
On 2 Mar 2015, at 09:16, Julian Elischer jul...@freebsd.org wrote:
if we develop a suitable post processor with pluggable grammars, we
save a lot of work.
given
On 3/2/15 5:27 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 3/2/15 4:14 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 3/1/15 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in
base
is a pain, and
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org wrote:
How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core utilities (some of
which, like ifconfig, rely on kernel APIs that change between releases) to
emit structured output. Maintaining two copies of each utility, one in the
On 03/01/15 13:25, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy
harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package
, since processing XML in base
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Harrison Grundy
harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package
, since processing XML in base is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or
HTML
On 2015-03-01 19:20, Arseny Nasokin wrote:
On 1 March 2015 at 22:10, Allan Jude allanj...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2015-03-01 13:49, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing
Hello.
First, I would be happy to have JSON and XML output about filesystems,
users, routes... but I don't like how it makes code of df, w, netstat
hard to read/maintain and often broken.
I don't think it would be good to continue with this. Maybe the effort
should be put to creating new
How about we allow JSON input on those utils too... Then we get into
full-blown hell faster.
Hmm... I would like to talk with system using JSON. JSON would be in
utils that are or at least function similarly to rm, mv, ls, find,
mount, zpool, zfs, geom, mdconfig, tar, df, netstat, ifconfig... (or
On 3/1/15 4:29 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall thera...@freebsd.org wrote:
How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core utilities (some of
which, like ifconfig, rely on kernel APIs that change between releases) to emit
structured output. Maintaining
On 3/1/15 4:57 PM, Harrison Grundy wrote:
I like the idea behind this... where I'm running into difficulty is why
these bits of functionality need to be combined. What someone does with
ifconfig on the command line, versus what someone wants to know about
their network interfaces in an XML
On 2015-03-01 13:49, Harrison Grundy wrote:
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional
utilities anyway.
(If I'm
On 1 Mar 2015, at 18:49, Harrison Grundy harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com
wrote:
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional
On Sun, 01 Mar 2015 11:26:01 -0500
Allan Jude allanj...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2015-03-01 08:33, Sulev-Madis Silber (ketas) wrote:
Hello.
First, I would be happy to have JSON and XML output about
filesystems, users, routes... but I don't like how it makes code of
df, w, netstat hard
On 2015-03-01 08:33, Sulev-Madis Silber (ketas) wrote:
Hello.
First, I would be happy to have JSON and XML output about filesystems,
users, routes... but I don't like how it makes code of df, w, netstat
hard to read/maintain and often broken.
I don't think it would be good to continue
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 11:26:01AM -0500, Allan Jude wrote:
On 2015-03-01 08:33, Sulev-Madis Silber (ketas) wrote:
Is there a specific bug you are running in to? So far the only bugs I've
seen with the xo-ification have been ones where the JSON output was not
always well formed.
Given the
On 03/01/15 05:33, Sulev-Madis Silber (ketas) wrote:
Hello.
First, I would be happy to have JSON and XML output about
filesystems, users, routes... but I don't like how it makes code of
df, w, netstat hard to read/maintain and often broken.
I don't think it would be good to continue
On Mar 1, 2015, at 09:25, Harrison Grundy harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com
wrote:
Due to the lack of XML parsing code in -base, the difficulty in
maintaining yet another interface, and the overhead involved in doing
it, I don't quite see where one would really want XML output *and* be
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Harrison Grundy
harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com wrote:
If someone could summarize what this is, I'd greatly appreciate it.
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2014-July/015633.html
___
Thanks!
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind
putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in base
is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional
utilities anyway.
(If I'm reviving a long-settled thing, let me know and I'll drop
On 03/01/15 11:11, David Chisnall wrote:
On 1 Mar 2015, at 18:49, Harrison Grundy
harrison.gru...@astrodoggroup.com wrote:
That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning
behind putting into base, over a port or package, since
processing XML in base is a pain, and it can't serve
On Mar 1, 2015, at 5:33, Sulev-Madis Silber (ketas) madis...@hot.ee wrote:
Hello.
First, I would be happy to have JSON and XML output about filesystems,
users, routes... but I don't like how it makes code of df, w, netstat
hard to read/maintain and often broken.
I don't think it would be
63 matches
Mail list logo
