Re: [PATCH v6 03/13] oxenstored: add support for systemd active sockets

["Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>]

On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:42:11AM +0000, Dave Scott wrote:
> 
> On 2 Jul 2014, at 20:09, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 02:08:23PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 18:18 -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/tools/ocaml/xenstored/systemd.ml b/tools/ocaml/xenstored/systemd.ml
> >>> new file mode 100644
> >>> index 0000000..2aa39ea
> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/tools/ocaml/xenstored/systemd.ml
> >> 
> >> Ideally the systemd ocaml bindings would come from a suitable ocaml
> >> library (opam or whatever). I suppose such a thing doesn't exist
> >> already?
> > 
> > Not that I was able to find but Ocaml folks can chime in.
> > 
> >> Perhaps Dave or Anil etc could advise on the feasibility of publishing
> >> these bindings as a separate project. In general I'd much rather we
> >> added build dependencies for things like that than incorporate things
> >> which are nothing to do with Xen etc into the tree (we've done too much
> >> of that in the past…)
> 
> The bindings could easily be published separately and then shared amongst
> several projects. They’ll be needed eventually for xapi anyway, so they could
> live somewhere in the xapi-project on github.
> 
> I like the principle that we should prefer build dependencies to
> incorporating non-core things in-tree. I’d like to do some trimming— for
> example Mirage has a nice xenstore client library that works in both
> userspace and kernelspace that we could use instead of the one currently in
> the tree which is userspace-only. Some of the other mirage libraries (such as
> the branching key-value store, ‘irmin’) ought to make the oxenstored
> implementation a lot smaller too.

I followed the license practice in-use for oxenstored for the systemd
interface, however I'm put to relicense the code to whatever might be
helpful for the purposes you mentioned, let me know.

> > Can't this be done as a separate step?
> 
> Adding these non-core bindings would violate this nice principle. However, if
> it’s only a couple of functions within oxenstored and not a whole new library
> (that would doubtless get packaged and probably end up conflicting with our
> stand-alone version and confusing people)... I could live with it, if this
> feature is considered important.

You folks make the call.

  Luis

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel