On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> What do you guys think of changing struct ceph_mount_t to struct
> >>> ceph_mount_info_t?
> >>>
> >> I per
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
> wrote:
>>>
>>> What do you guys think of changing struct ceph_mount_t to struct
>>> ceph_mount_info_t?
>>>
>> I personally don't like sticking a _t prefix to a struct. It's e
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
wrote:
>>
>> What do you guys think of changing struct ceph_mount_t to struct
>> ceph_mount_info_t?
>>
> I personally don't like sticking a _t prefix to a struct. It's either
> a typedef or a struct.
>
Ahrm.. *postfix*
--
To unsubscribe from
>
> What do you guys think of changing struct ceph_mount_t to struct
> ceph_mount_info_t?
>
I personally don't like sticking a _t prefix to a struct. It's either
a typedef or a struct.
Yehuda
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to major
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
>> > I pushed a patch to master that adds this. It's now
>> >
>> > struct ceph_mount_t;
>> >
>> > which is sort of annoying: the _t suffix really shouldn't be there. But
>> > if it's just ceph_mo
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
> > I pushed a patch to master that adds this. It's now
> >
> > struct ceph_mount_t;
> >
> > which is sort of annoying: the _t suffix really shouldn't be there. But
> > if it's just ceph_mount it conflicts with int ceph_mount()... :/
> >
> > sage
>
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Tommi Virtanen
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Brian Chrisman wrote:
>> >> ceph_mount_t is forward declared as a struct in libceph.h.
>> >> W
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Tommi Virtanen
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Brian Chrisman wrote:
> >> ceph_mount_t is forward declared as a struct in libceph.h.
> >> When referencing that within libceph.h, gcc barfs:
> >> clie
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Tommi Virtanen
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Brian Chrisman wrote:
>> ceph_mount_t is forward declared as a struct in libceph.h.
>> When referencing that within libceph.h, gcc barfs:
>> client/libceph.h:32: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘*’ token
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Brian Chrisman wrote:
> ceph_mount_t is forward declared as a struct in libceph.h.
> When referencing that within libceph.h, gcc barfs:
> client/libceph.h:32: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘*’ token
>
> Is libceph.h intended to be used in C-programs, and if s
ceph_mount_t is forward declared as a struct in libceph.h.
When referencing that within libceph.h, gcc barfs:
client/libceph.h:32: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘*’ token
Is libceph.h intended to be used in C-programs, and if so, am I using
it incorrectly?
ceph_mount_t is defined as a class in libcep
Hi all,
I pushed the DIR* change and the connect->mount change.
Check it out.
I'm going to try to get the hadoop bindings up and running in libceph_api.
sincerely,
C.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
Mo
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Colin McCabe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>>
>> The (re/ab)use of DIR* was possibly not the wisest choice in the original
>> API (and Client.h for that matter?). Now might be the time to use a more
>> reasonably named typedef.
>
>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I pushed a branch with a revised libceph API. The main changes:
>>
>> * similar appearance to librados. It should be intuitive if you've
>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I pushed a branch with a revised libceph API. The main changes:
>>
>> * similar appearance to librados. It should be intuitive if you've
>
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Colin McCabe wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I pushed a branch with a revised libceph API. The main changes:
>
> * similar appearance to librados. It should be intuitive if you've
> used librados.
> * The new API allows multiple ceph clusters to be op
On Wednesday, April 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Colin McCabe wrote:
Hi guys,
>
> I pushed a branch with a revised libceph API. The main changes:
>
> * similar appearance to librados. It should be intuitive if you've
> used librados.
> * The new API allows multiple ceph clus
Hi guys,
I pushed a branch with a revised libceph API. The main changes:
* similar appearance to librados. It should be intuitive if you've
used librados.
* The new API allows multiple ceph clusters to be open at once
(although the implementation doesn't support this yet)
* ability
18 matches
Mail list logo