On 9/1/13 12:49, "Gémes Géza" <[email protected]> wrote: >2013-09-01 14:57 keltezéssel, Gémes Géza írta: >> Sorry if it sounds nitpickering, but I want to be sure, I didn't >> misunderstood your idea. >> In a nutshell your proposal for me is to design a swig interface >> around exec calls for the existing binaries (like bos, vos, fs, etc.)? >> And after having a stable interface try to modify the backend part of >> the interface, to call into the underlying code? >> >>Sorry if I wasn't clear with my intentions. I plan to have a python >interface, where all the parts (volumes, pts entries, cache, etc) would >be represented as objects. So basically I plan to have a few classes >like volume, pts, cache, bos, with properties reflecting their state and >methods for manipulating them.
The main point here is that the interfaces you want to use are not actually usefully in libraries for you to bind to. Libadmin is unmaintained and out of date and nobody knows if it even works at this point. If you really want to do this, either you wrap the command line utilities, or you get to redesign those utilities so that their functionality is in bindable libraries. Don't try to make a parallel library like libadmin was; it'll just bitrot the way libadmin did. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates [email protected] [email protected] unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad
