Dear developers,
I think the discussion have gone off in another direction than the title
proposes (I have no opinion on that matter) but for what it is worth I just now
created an ooRexx installation that runs of a USB stick, with no use of
superuser powers whatsoever.
It is only for MAC but
I'm inclined to err on the side of caution, myself. After all, this
is introducing a new keyword for the ADDRESS statement with a
potential for breakage; e.g.
with = 'C:\Chip\bin\'
Address COMMAND 'DIR' with
At the very least, that will generate an astonishing error message
("Error 25:
The pipes-based version has one rxapi deamon per user. In fact, the pipe
file is owned and only accessible by the user that spawned the rxapi
daemon. That means another user has no way of accessing the pipe. I should
have some time tomorrow so I can see how much work it is for *nix, but I'd
need
My concern with getting this done is the support for *ix systems. I
need to figure out the correct mechanism to do the redirection and write
the corresponding code. Then there is the issue of getting a *ix build
and testing that build in a *ix environment, neither of which can I do
at the
Does the pipes-based version have real user isolation? In other words, do
you end up with one process per user? That would be a very good thing if we
can get the real isolation. However, I think I share your opinion about
trying to rush a replacement into 5.0.0. Historically, the rxapi daemon has
Hmmm, I'm very much of the opposite opinion. I could have something working
in a week or two. I've got a fair amount of the code written already,
although I'm now at the tedious part of doing the command parsing and
getting all of the error messages defined. The only part I'm really missing
is the
Hi,
yes, I was playing around with supporting pipes as another means of binding
to the rxapi daemon. It was a rather simple change, the main effort was in
extending/changing the communication abstraction classes not to assume they
were socket-based. I had it running on Linux and I assume the same
Hi Gil,
True - that might be better. And a year passes quickly, as we have seen. I am
starting on the transports to SF, release notes and docs.
@Erich, it is not really necessary to actually build the docs on all platforms?
Do they have any dependencies there?
René.
> On 30 Mar 2018, at
While I, too, am excited about ADDRESS WITH and am sure we will move
much more quickly with Rick's involvement than if I were tackling it
alone, I cannot estimate how long this will take to complete. So, my
recommendation is to NOT hold the release of 5.0.0 for any longer than
necessary to
Moritz,
After Gil’s talk I am also excited about ADDRESS WITH (and the fact that it has
been taken up by Rick) so we might hold off the freeze for some time until we
have all infrastructure and installers ready (and maybe have ADDRESS WITH).
Maybe this gives us also time to look into the
Hi Moritz,
I have never heard of those but I am certainly interested. The visibility issue
we might address even earlier with a clear part of the ooRexx website (that
needs serious revision) dedicated to it. This weekend I am going to make sure
that we have all builds available on SF.
best
On 03/27/2018 06:50 PM, Erich Steinböck wrote:
>>
>> showstoppers in ooRexx 5.0 ?
>>
>
> René,
> except for Windows, Ubuntu, CentOS and a bunch of (now outdated) RPM's
I think after the 5.0.0 release we should consider using services such
as Travis CI or Appveyor to run our builds. Both are free
12 matches
Mail list logo
