From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 1 19:12:03 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D88A52CC for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 19:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "cloud.theravensnest.org", Issuer "StartCom Class 1 Primary Intermediate Server CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9992B8D6 for ; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 19:12:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.7] (cpc16-cmbg15-2-0-cust60.5-4.cable.virginm.net [86.5.162.61]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t21JBp45019846 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 1 Mar 2015 19:11:54 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: theravensnest.org: Host cpc16-cmbg15-2-0-cust60.5-4.cable.virginm.net [86.5.162.61] claimed to be [192.168.0.7] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) Subject: Re: Massive libxo-zation that breaks everything From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: <54F35F29.4000603@astrodoggroup.com> Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2015 19:11:45 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <54F31510.7050607@hot.ee> <54F34B6E.2040809@astrodoggroup.com> <54F35F29.4000603@astrodoggroup.com> To: Harrison Grundy X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 19:12:03 -0000 On 1 Mar 2015, at 18:49, Harrison Grundy = wrote: >=20 > That does seem useful, but I'm not sure I see the reasoning behind > putting into base, over a port or package, since processing XML in = base > is a pain, and it can't serve up JSON or HTML without additional > utilities anyway. How would it be in a port? It involves modifying core utilities (some = of which, like ifconfig, rely on kernel APIs that change between = releases) to emit structured output. Maintaining two copies of each = utility, one in the base system with plain-text output only and another = in ports with XML/JSON output would be very painful. The goal of having machine-readable output in the base system is that = people building systems atop FreeBSD will be able to expect a stable, = machine-parsable, extensible, output from these tools. If you're = building a web admin GUI or automated administration tool for FreeBSD = 11, or improving integration in your favourite DE, then you should be = able to rely on the output from base system tools, without having to = depend on anything external. My only concern with libxo at present is that many of the modified tools = are not emitting self-describing output (e.g. not specifying units for = things), but that's something that we have a year to shake out before = 11. David