Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [hackers-il] a simple linux registry

Expand Messages
  • Shlomi Fish
    ... Well, personally, I don t find it too user friendly. Most users (including me) would prefer if all the relevant information was present in a small number
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 11, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      On Sunday 11 April 2004 19:29, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
      > I saw an interesting project lately: a Perfect Configuration System
      > [tm], but designed with simplicity in mind: Each key resides in its own
      > text file, and the registry sits in its own tree structure.
      >
      > http://registry.sourceforge.net/
      >
      > The only disatvantages I can think of is the disk space consumption.
      > I wonder How much can ReiserFS help here? XFS?
      >
      >
      > But the atvantages are obvious: everything remains a file:
      >
      > * can use whaever permission scheme is used on the system
      > * moving a subtree is an atomic operation.
      > * I wonder if symlinks are sensible
      > * Can be easily manipulated with the tools we all know
      >
      > Comments? Flames? Will you use it in your own project?

      Well, personally, I don't find it too user friendly. Most users (including me)
      would prefer if all the relevant information was present in a small number of
      files that can be managed using several editor instances. (preferablly even
      just one that is relevant to the problem at hand). Tweaking of fixing a
      registry like that by hand sounds like a real nightmare.

      Usually, I prefer INI-formatted or a similar simple minded configuration file.
      Some INI-files implementations (like Perl's Config::IniFiles), support
      nesting INI sections, to produce a Windows registry like effect. (while still
      keeping the accessibility of text files).

      XML for configuration is probably not such a good idea if you want it to be
      editable by hand. YAML seems like a better choice in this regard, but I don't
      speak from experience on this. Of course, YAML is not as expressive as XML
      is.

      Regards,

      Shlomi Fish

      ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
      Homepage: http://shlomif.il.eu.org/

      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
      [Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.]
    • Elad Efrat
      ... [...] i think it s gay ugly stupid pointless messy huge and a waste of time
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 26, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

        > I saw an interesting project lately: a Perfect Configuration System
        > [tm], but designed with simplicity in mind: Each key resides in its own
        > text file, and the registry sits in its own tree structure.
        >
        > http://registry.sourceforge.net/
        [...]

        i think it's gay ugly stupid pointless messy huge and a waste of time
      • Muli Ben-Yehuda
        ... time Oh, come on, don t be shy - tell us what you really think about it! Cheers, Muli -- Muli Ben-Yehuda http://www.mulix.org |
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 26, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 02:00:37PM +0300, Elad Efrat wrote:
          >
          > On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
          >
          > > I saw an interesting project lately: a Perfect Configuration System
          > > [tm], but designed with simplicity in mind: Each key resides in its own
          > > text file, and the registry sits in its own tree structure.
          > >
          > > http://registry.sourceforge.net/
          > [...]
          >
          > i think it's gay ugly stupid pointless messy huge and a waste of
          time

          Oh, come on, don't be shy - tell us what you really think about it!

          Cheers,
          Muli
          --
          Muli Ben-Yehuda
          http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/
        • Tzafrir Cohen
          ... BTW: that page is not currently availbe for some reason. Try http://sf.net/projects/registry ... Ugly, stupid, pointless: maybe. Huge: sure it isn t. Look
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 28, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 02:00:37PM +0300, Elad Efrat wrote:
            >
            > On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
            >
            > > http://registry.sourceforge.net/

            BTW: that page is not currently availbe for some reason. Try
            http://sf.net/projects/registry

            > [...]
            >
            > i think it's gay ugly stupid pointless messy huge and a waste of time

            Ugly, stupid, pointless: maybe.

            Huge: sure it isn't. Look at the size of the code of the library. Comare
            to gnome's gconf .

            Oh and: Why do you choose to waste your breath and time on it?

            Cheers.

            --
            Tzafrir Cohen +---------------------------+
            http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend|
            mailto:tzafrir@... +---------------------------+
          • Beni Cherniavsky
            ... If it becomes a problem, ReiserFS is definitely a solution. Enabling this sort of things is the purpose that initially motivated ReiserFS. ... I find the
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 30, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Tzafrir Cohen wrote on 2004-04-11:
              > I saw an interesting project lately: a Perfect Configuration System
              > [tm], but designed with simplicity in mind: Each key resides in its own
              > text file, and the registry sits in its own tree structure.
              >
              > http://registry.sourceforge.net/
              >
              > The only disatvantages I can think of is the disk space consumption.
              > I wonder How much can ReiserFS help here? XFS?
              >
              If it becomes a problem, ReiserFS is definitely a solution. Enabling
              this sort of things is the purpose that initially motivated ReiserFS.

              > But the atvantages are obvious: everything remains a file:
              >
              > * can use whaever permission scheme is used on the system
              > * moving a subtree is an atomic operation.
              > * I wonder if symlinks are sensible
              > * Can be easily manipulated with the tools we all know
              >
              > Comments? Flames? Will you use it in your own project?
              >
              I find the key format to be suboptimal.

              - What's that about 20..39 for binary formats and 40..254 for text
              formats? Why?!? Why not use something extensible, like names?
              Why not use something established, like MIME types?

              - I don't think a standard header would do anybody good. Without a
              header, existing file types could be used with full support from
              existing tools (think images - how many image viewers skip everything
              until ``<DATA>``?).

              - Without a header, we don't need the `rg` command. `ls`, `cat`,
              etc., SHOULD be directly useful on the "registry", otherwise you
              lose half the benefits.

              Let's see what it takes to get rid of the header:

              - Format version - not relevant if there is no registry format.

              - Data type & comments - if you need these at all, it makes more
              sense to use a gconf-like model where the expected type and
              key meaning documentation are stored separately as a "scheme".
              That way a user overwriting the key won't lose the documentation.
              That's good.

              - If you do need the metadata per-instance of the key, the ideal
              option would be to use subfiles of the file, as will be possible
              in reiserfs4 (any file also behaves as a directory). Otherwise,
              less beautiful arrangements are possible...

              That's it - no headers! No headers => no need for a special tool and
              to a great extent even no need for a library!


              --
              Beni Cherniavsky <cben@...>
              Note: I can only read email on week-ends...
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.