Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 20 May 2014 22:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:      "Chris H" <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com>
To:        "Alfred Perlstein" <bright@mu.org>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Erik Cederstrand <erik+lists@cederstrand.dk>, Chris H <bsd-lists@bsdforge.com>
Subject:   Re: [GSoC] Machine readable output from userland utilities
Message-ID:  <2ac30e8c9d22b09dacb4446722a5b61e.authenticated@ultimatedns.net>
In-Reply-To: <537C335C.3060105@mu.org>
References:  <49E9736E-AD14-4647-8B15-30603D01360C@mail.bg> <91FE2526-F21C-42AB-BECB-058DBA975A9E@cederstrand.dk> <537C2993.1060206@mu.org> <f17ef374463361cc4d42009f7b418f67.authenticated@ultimatedns.net> <537C335C.3060105@mu.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> On 5/20/14, 9:58 PM, Chris H wrote:
>>>
>>> Basically the idea would be to write a simple tool that is able to
>>> extract using an xpath or json selector.
>>>
>>> Example (very rough code):
>>>
>>>    ifconfig --output xml | selector --format xml --path /name --path
>>> /name/etheraddr  | \
>>>       while read name ether ; do
>>>         echo "Interface $name has hardware address $ether" ;
>>>       done
>>>
>>> In all seriousness though, the real target is people writing higher
>>> level languages (than shell) on top of FreeBSD.  Perhaps python or ruby
>>> spawning a utility and then that utility making the output easy to read.
>>>
>>> One thing to note is that the output should not just be formatted but
>>> normalized as well.  The fact that "uptime" can emit 15 different
>>> formats for the uptime string is terrible for people coding on top of
>>> the base utils, the json/xml/other output should be decided on some form
>>> of normalized data likely in seconds + microseconds or something, but
>>> anything truly machine readable is better than the current output when
>>> popen'd by a webapp.
>>>
>>> -Alfred
>> Greetings, all.
>> I may be getting into this thread a bit late in the game. But if I
>> understand the gist of this correctly; isn't all this pretty much what
>> Perl was intended for?
>>
>> All the best.
>
> I can't tell if you're late or early since the connection is breaking
> up, but from what I can make out you're stuck in 1997.
LOL. That's good. :)
I'm clearly missing something -- no, not the 21st century. ;)
But just for the record; I meant nothing negative by my assertion.
It just /seemed/ like Perl would/could be capable.

--Chris
>
> -Alfred
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2ac30e8c9d22b09dacb4446722a5b61e.authenticated>