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

Re: [hackers-il] a simple linux registry

Expand Messages
  • Elad Efrat
    ... [...] i think it s gay ugly stupid pointless messy huge and a waste of time
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 26, 2004
      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 2 of 7 , Apr 26, 2004
        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 3 of 7 , Apr 28, 2004
          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 4 of 7 , Apr 30, 2004
            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.