Re: [linux-lvm] Writing forward compatible applications using /proc

[Ragnar Kjørstad <lvm ragnark vestdata no>]

On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 10:08:58AM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote:
> > Why will liblvm disappear? To me using a library interface seems much
> > nicer than wrapping applications.
> 
> Because it's means there's yet another interface (along with the
> command line tools, and ioctl's) to constrain any implementation
> changes.  Command line tool interface will not change.  liblvm (if it
> still existed as a shared library) will change drastically between 1.0
> and 2.0 - not least because it in turn reflects the driver ioctl
> interface.

I'm not complaining if it's changing, but if it's going away, that's bad
:(

> The experimental branch has a single lvm tool, with liblvm statically
> linked into it.  There's no need for the outside world to know about
> liblvm.
> 
> It may be a good idea for Sistina to produce a tiny 'wrap the tools'
> library for use by gui implementors.

yach! An uncomplete list of uglyness:
* Errorhandling
* fork/exec
* having to format input arguments as strings (and quote them)
* having to parse output data from strings 


-- 
Ragnar Kjorstad
Big Storage