On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 17:37 +0100, Benjamin Collar wrote:
> Hi Nathanael
>
> the epkg code looks fine to me, and I also think the idea works out.
> It's good that you provided the non _main interface, which leads me
> to...
>
> The whole "exec so we can call wget" thing still bugs me. Do you all
> feel the effort needed to split the wget code into two parts: a
> wget_main, which parses the argv and such, and do_wget, which has all
> the meat, is worth it? That way from our code we could just call
> do_wget. It's kind of an intrusive thing, but I think the complexity of
> doing the exec is a worse solution.
It does not seem really that complex.
It just makes us cringe a little...
char *cmdline[] = { "wget", "-c", "-q", fullurl };
- int rval = wget_main(4, cmdline);
+ int rval = execvp("/proc/self/exe", cmdline);
Thankfully the kernel will already have us page cache.
Being that everything is linux we can be assured that chances are
anybody using this app will have a /proc will be mounted (bb does this
in other apps).
> Ben
>
> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 10:51 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 20:04 +0100, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Just a little report of the do_unpack for emerge.c (the busybox applet)
> > >
> > > I have got the logic working, but I need to clean it up a bit. I'm doing
> > > a separate applet, epkg. Currently it just installs a binary, but it can
> > > do it from stdin. This has a function tbz2_install that can be called
> > > from emerge.c.
> > >
> > > int tbz2_install(FILE *instream, const char *root_dir,
> > > const char *vdb_path, const char *install_mask);
> > >
> > > So the do upack would look like:
> > >
> > > infile = fopen(tbz2file);
> > > tbz2install(infile, config.root_dir, "var/db/pkg", config.install_mask);
> > > close(infile);
> > >
> > > you get the idea...
> > >
> > > I also need to modify the tar -j ... stuff in epkg to use the
> > > "unarchive.h" stuff instead of popen("tar -j ...").
> >
> > Great cuz popen() is just evil.
> >
> > > I'll send a patch as soon I have cleaned it up a bit.
> > >
> > > I have a couple of questions though:
> > >
> > > * what do you think of having a separate applet and let emerge.c run on
> > > top of this applet?
> > If you willing to code it and it's good code then I see no reason not to
> > use this as a backend tool.
> >
> > > This is not necessary, but I think its more
> > > according to the unix philosopy. many cooperating small programs rather
> > > than one big do-everything program...
> > >
> > > * what do you think of the name "epkg"? I can rename it to tbz2pkg,
> > > tbz2install/tbz2uninstall or whatever.
> > the name seems fine to me. Short and sweet.
> >
> > > * Could it be interesting to have a C written epkg (or whatever the name
> > > ends up with) for standard glibc gentoo? I cannot see any good reason to
> > > not.
> > You would have to talk to our python guru's about that gentoo-portage-dev
> > ml.
> > For the most part they are pretty uninterested in code that's not python.
> >
> > > --
> > > Natanael Copa
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > [email protected] mailing list
> > >
--
Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
[email protected] mailing list
