>
>Step 1.
> In case libunionfs is a way similar to libusb,
I do not see unionfs having anything to do with usb.
> why don't merge them at the first place?
> Okay, let's say we create generic lib for data access
> via sysfs, combining libunionfs+libusb demands.
Except for living under /sys, there is no guarantee that any file will look
like another. With one exception, which is this wrapper
void set_new_value(const char *file, const char *value) {
open(file)
write(file, value)
close(file);
}
but that's just a small one for boilerplate code.
>Step 2.
> Once libANYsys (libsysfs?) is created,
There is already a libsysfs!
21:46 shanghai:~ > locate libsysfs
/lib/libsysfs.so.1
/lib/libsysfs.so.1.0.3
/usr/include/sysfs/libsysfs.h
/usr/lib/libsysfs.a
/usr/lib/libsysfs.la
/usr/lib/libsysfs.so
21:46 shanghai:~ > rpm -qf /lib/libsysfs.so.1.0.3
sysfsutils-1.3.0-14
> how to manage specific devices configuration?
> External [re]loadable configuration comes into play,
> resource manager, hotplug devices, etc...
>
>Step 3. (or step 0?)
> Let's look around to see whether libsysfs already has
> implemented some or out needs.
>
>
>Still confusing?
>--w
>_______________________________________________
>unionfs mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
>
Jan Engelhardt
--
| Software Engineer and Linux/Unix Network Administrator
| Alphagate Systems, http://alphagate.hopto.org/
| jengelh's site, http://jengelh.hopto.org/
_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
