Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 2 Mar 2015 09:23:55 +0000
From:      David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com>
Cc:        Harrison Grundy <harrison.grundy@astrodoggroup.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Massive libxo-zation that breaks everything
Message-ID:  <AEB1CF1E-9429-4C86-A59E-E1C86C019098@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <75C49F53-C675-4712-A446-370025EED037@me.com>
References:  <54F31510.7050607@hot.ee> <54F34B6E.2040809@astrodoggroup.com> <CAG=rPVfcB1Fy_8mHq-t5Ay07yrzuSGthQ0ZcGzvp0XG9gSSzkg@mail.gmail.com> <54F35F29.4000603@astrodoggroup.com> <F1683E9A-6004-4749-BD6E-A5B2472F6C77@FreeBSD.org> <75C49F53-C675-4712-A446-370025EED037@me.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 Mar 2015, at 21:29, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> wrote:
>=20
> On Mar 1, 2015, at 11:11, David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> 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.
>=20
> It would work fine if we had *libraries* for =
ifconfig/netstat/route/etc.  Obviously that's not the case and no one =
has stepped up to implement them.  I've also seen FreeBSD committers =
expressing their distaste for libraries for "trivial" command line =
utilities, which implies they are unaware of another world beyond the =
CLI.  :-)

I am completely in favour of libraries for the underlying functionality =
of these commands and would love to see all of the system management =
commands become thin wrappers around a library, though it's a lot of =
engineering work.  In particular, these libraries will need to have =
stable APIs that we can support across multiple major releases, and =
getting those right is difficult.  We really don't want to be stuck in =
10 years maintaining a hastily designed API for a library.

I see one use of the libxo output as helping to design those APIs.  =
People are going to wrap various tools in libraries for their favourite =
scripting languages and this will give us a corpus for experimenting.

It's also worth noting that often invoking a tool and consuming its =
output is the easiest way to get a stable API and ABI where performance =
is not a primary concern (i.e. most management interfaces).

As to a world beyond the CLI, I saw a nice demo a few years ago of a =
terminal emulator that used WebKit and came with a hacked-up set of =
parsers for common tools.  I'd love to have something simpler (no need =
for a full WebKit - simple outline and table views would be enough and =
could be done with curses for ssh) for FreeBSD where I could type ls in =
the CLI and get a table view that I could then sort and filter by =
selecting column headings.  Those of us that have used Lisp and =
Smalltalk environments know that a CLI doesn't have to be a teletype =
emulator.

David




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AEB1CF1E-9429-4C86-A59E-E1C86C019098>