Re: httpfs

2001-03-18 Thread Robert Watson
On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: > You could certainly write a program to sit in the middle and cache > the request to handle that case. > > The problem with portalfs is that you can't 'cd' into it or do > directory operations on it, and filesystem operations such as lseek

Re: httpfs

2001-03-18 Thread Matt Dillon
:I don't really think that portalfs is the right thing to use to build :an httpfs with, but I would like to see how you managed to get your example :to work. Are you using stdout to create an anonymous file handle? What happens :if two processes concurrently read from /p/http/*? : :D

Re: httpfs

2001-03-18 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 05:03:42PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 04:53:34PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > There was at the time - socketpair(2) had totally slip

Re: httpfs

2001-03-17 Thread Daniel O'Connor
On 17-Mar-01 Peter Pentchev wrote: > Actually, I want socketpair(2). pipe(2) was what I used before, > and that's the reason I had a read-only file descriptor - the portalfs > architecture allows for only one fd to be returned, and pipe(2) > provides a one-way pipe. I dup2'd stdout and stde

Re: httpfs

2001-03-17 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 04:53:34PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > There was at the time - socketpair(2) had totally slipped my mind ;) > > Umm, you want pipe(2), not socketpair(2). > Actually, I wa

Re: httpfs

2001-03-17 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 04:53:34PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > There was at the time - socketpair(2) had totally slipped my mind ;) > > Umm, you want pipe(2), not socketpair(2). Actually, I want socketpair(2). pipe(2) was what I used before

Re: httpfs

2001-03-17 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There was at the time - socketpair(2) had totally slipped my mind ;) Umm, you want pipe(2), not socketpair(2). DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the bo

Re: httpfs

2001-03-16 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 05:46:49AM +, Tony Finch wrote: > Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >What I did was implement an 'exec' portal method, which executes a program > >with given arguments, obtained from the path components and portal.conf > >rules, and returns a - basically r

Re: httpfs

2001-03-16 Thread Tony Finch
Peter Pentchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >What I did was implement an 'exec' portal method, which executes a program >with given arguments, obtained from the path components and portal.conf >rules, and returns a - basically read-only - descriptor connected to its >stdout and stderr. Kind of si

Re: httpfs

2001-03-15 Thread Peter Pentchev
s is the right thing to use to build > an httpfs with, but I would like to see how you managed to get your example > to work. Are you using stdout to create an anonymous file handle? What happens > if two processes concurrently read from /p/http/*? What I did was implement an 'exec'

Re: httpfs

2001-03-15 Thread Duncan Barclay
portal.conf then you can see how this can be used to open a socket via a pathname. Operations on the socket are then make using write(2) etc. I don't really think that portalfs is the right thing to use to build an httpfs with, but I would like to see how you managed to get your example to work. Ar

Re: httpfs

2001-03-15 Thread Jordan Hubbard
I'd say it would be an excellent example of how to use portals if nothing else, given that almost nobody understands them. :) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: httpfs

2001-03-14 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 03:15:15AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have > this already, in the form of the (under-utilised) portalfs. Portalfs > work

Re: httpfs

2001-03-11 Thread Gregory Sutter
On 2001-03-10 13:36 -0500, Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to > > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have > > th

Re: httpfs

2001-03-10 Thread Robert Watson
s On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have > this already, in the form of the (under-utilised) portalfs. Portalfs > works by handing off everyth

Re: httpfs

2001-03-10 Thread Mathew KANNER
On Mar 10, Kris Kennaway wrote: > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have > this already, in the form of the (under-utilised) portalfs. Portalfs > works by handing off everything t

Re: httpfs

2001-03-10 Thread Gordon Tetlow
g. Night. -gordon On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to > have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have > this already, in the form of the (under-utilised) portalfs. Portalfs > works by h

httpfs

2001-03-10 Thread Kris Kennaway
A few of us were talking on IRC tonight about how cool it would be to have an httpfs filesystem -- then it occurred to me we almost have this already, in the form of the (under-utilised) portalfs. Portalfs works by handing off everything to a userland daemon which handles the actual transaction