On 2024/6/6 11:17, Chen Linxuan wrote:
On 2024/6/6 11:13, Gao Xiang wrote:
On 2024/6/6 11:06, Chen Linxuan wrote:
On 2024/6/6 10:45, Gao Xiang wrote:
On 2024/6/6 10:25, Chen Linxuan wrote:
Hi,
On 2024/6/6 10:22, Gao Xiang wrote:
Hi,
On 2024/6/6 10:13, Chen Linxuan wrote:
Hi Xiang!
On 2024/5/23 16:05, Gao Xiang wrote:
Hi Comix!
On 2024/5/23 15:31, ComixHe wrote:
In some cases, developer may need to integrate erofs-utils into their
proejct as a static library to reduce package dependencies and
have more finer control over the feature used by the project.
Thanks for sharing this.
For exapmle, squashfuse provides a static library `libsquashfuse.a` and
We want a static library for running fuse-erofs, maybe liberofsfuse or
something like that, to make a appimage like bundle with erofs.
For quite a long time, Appimage guys patch the fuse program of squashfs to get
such a static library, and this patch is accepted by Debian.
https://github.com/AppImageCommunity/libappimage/blob/master/src/patches/squashfuse.patch
https://salsa.debian.org/sgmoore/squashfuse/-/commit/489b04eb7f5e45478f2ba5cd8d7173bb96
The patch just make a binary to be a static library by changing `main` to
`fusefs_main`.
Since squashfs don't have any offical libsquashfs, so I guess they tried
export the squashfuse project as a library.
But erofs-utils is quite another story since we already have an offical
`liberofs` concept. If you'd like to export some FUSE interface, would
you mind moving some logic in fuse/ to lib/? Does this way also work
for you?
Sure.
We will send other patches later.
Err, sorry, a second thought.. If you just would like
to move all code from fuse/main.c to lib/, I also think
it's somewhat strange.
So just address your requirement (erofsfuse_main), would
you mind just export liberofsfuse static library instead?
Since it's a bit tangled with libfuse version, so I'm now
hesitated to move into lib/...
So you mean that I should export a static library call "liberofsfuse".
And the only function it has is erofsfuse_main. Am I right?
You could export any function in the fuse/main.c, also you
could rename main() as erofsfuse_main() for the liberofsfuse
library.
But where should I place the source code of this new library? "liberofsfuse/",
"lib/fuse" or somewhere else?
Just like the current patch, fuse/main.c is okay for me (since
Maybe you want to check the original patch again?
We build liberofsfuse with -Dmain=erofsfuse_main at that patch, which sounds
like what you suggest here.
That is also fine with me, anyway, liberofsfuse is a very special
case for us, I'd like to just build a static library for
erofsfuse only (because liberofs will be exported as a dynamic
library in later versions, I don't want to rely on random libfuse
interface).
For other usage, I'd suggest form some formal APIs in liberofs
instead.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Thanks,
Chen Linxuan
it's tangled with libfuse internals), but I guess we'd better
to avoid self-contained libmkerofs and more. `liberofs` is
much better to be directy used for mkfs, fsck usage.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Thanks,
Chen Linxuan
For mkfs, I guess we will have offical API interfaces for
users to build images later, so libmkerofs is not worthwhile.
I'm not sure dump.erofs is useful too since low-level APIs
are provided. As for fsck, it's similar to mkfs in the future.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Thanks,
Chen Linxuan
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
