From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@redhat.com>
To: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
Cc: frysk <frysk@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: frysk.proc.{ptrace,corefile} -> frysk.proc.{live,dead}
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4672A4C3.4060009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1181898053.4482.28.camel@dijkstra.wildebeest.org>
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Yes, but my point is more that pre-mature refactoring at this point
> seems not a good idea. We don't seem to have all the information yet.
> But maybe you do have a clear picture already. I am trying to get an
> idea what we would really gain from it at this point. Which api users do
> you have in mind and what are they doing now through frysk.proc (or
> directly through frysk.proc.ptrace and frsyk.proc.core) that would be
> better modeled through the proposed properties-based package
> abstractions?
>
>
The user visible interface is frysk.proc, the rest is internal.
We could equally argue that the frysk.proc.ptrace refactoring was
pre-mature. For that we discussed, agreed, and then I implemented; the
result while a step forward has clear problems; perhaps I could revert
it. This next step is along that path.
Remember, live processes can change state and so have observers, dead
processes do not.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-15 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-13 13:17 Andrew Cagney
2007-06-14 10:11 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-14 14:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-15 9:05 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-15 15:04 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2007-06-15 19:44 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-18 18:15 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-18 19:06 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-18 23:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-19 8:59 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-19 22:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2007-06-20 9:21 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-06-19 8:32 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4672A4C3.4060009@redhat.com \
--to=cagney@redhat.com \
--cc=frysk@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark@klomp.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).