Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2000, Eric Lee Green wrote:
> >> Most mtio type ioctls are already non-portable.
> >
> >But most of them can be "wrapped" to present a coherent interface to
> >applications software. Unfortunately, this ends up being a
> >least-common-denominator type approach, where the "wrapper" function can only
> >take advantage of those capabilities available on all involved platforms. I
> >suspect Kai was mostly saying that adding too much stuff to the mtio ioctl
> >would not help most applications due to those portability issues.
>
> 'rmt' handles most of the tape I/O -- at least the ones that matter (local
> binaries are irrelevant.) It cannot tell what platform is sending it data.
I've thought and looked, and come to the conclusion that the whole 'rmt'
approach does not work well on a cross-platform basis. Unix is not the only
platform, you know. A true OS-independent RPC mechanism is the way to go.
> Again, how will a remote system get this informaion? The ioctl() structures
> are there for a reason; don't try to reinvent the wheel just because you don't
> like it's color.
I might point out, BTW, that even *LOCAL* systems cannot currently get the
information that Kai is proposing to put into /proc , so it's not as if we're
talking about removing functionality.
Disclaimer: I may be biased as to the "proper" solution for cross-platform
tape work. I'm willing to listen, though.
--
Eric Lee Green [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Software Engineer Visit our Web page:
Enhanced Software Technologies, Inc. http://www.estinc.com/
(602) 470-1115 voice (602) 470-1116 fax
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
