2010/4/11 Robert Watson <rwat...@freebsd.org> > So I have no particular opinion on this tool, but I will say that in > general, it would be nice if programs were often thin wrappers around a > library that could be reused, not just command line tools. > > Robert >
Robert, The reusable library is great. The question is how it works with the underlying system. When dealing with a package database, one may provide a library which directly reads and writes the database. On the other hand, the library may re-use some command-line tools. In the latter case there are chances for the package manipulating tool to stay consistent even if the memory in the calling process (which uses the library) is damaged. The database files are also less likely to became corrupted. Of course, run-time performance should be sacrificed. To summarize, there are two ways: 1) Provide the re-library and make command-line tools be just wrappers around the library. 2) Provide command-line tools and make the library to be just a wrapper around the tools. Approaches provide different trade-offs between run-time performance and isolation. Alexander Churanov _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
