Re: GSOC project

[Alex Hornung <ahornung@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 27/03/12 20:09, Robert David wrote:
> In debian package system (which I count as good reference) there are
> these packages that depend on libudev: 

You might also want to look into what uses libudev indirectly, through
udev-disks (udisks?) and similar stuff. That list might well be more
interesting and indicative.

> From the libudev vs libattr function difference, there are ~30
> functions missing, some of them may be easy to implement with just
> makro or some easy function.

Well - actually libdevattr has never been used yet as a replacement of
libudev, so that would be part of the project. It's all about seeing how
usable libdevattr is at the moment as a libudev-"clone", and
implementing other features that are useful/necessary to run other
applications. As I was pointing out, the main effort would probably be
porting something like udisks, and providing all the functionality it
requires; then seeing whether linux apps are happy about that.

> But Alex is right that a lot of missing functions are somehow relevant
> to sysfs interaction. It is questionable how much of them need to be
> implemented in dragonfly so far. And how much of them are really used.

I would presume that for udisks and other "middleware" sysfs is an
important component, so yea, odds are that this project would move into
a thin sysfs-like implementation, ideally in userland. But this requires
a lot more investigation - it might not even be doable in the scope of a
gsoc project.

HTH,
Alex