Re: [PATCH 1/5] exec: remove support for transparently unbzip2ing executables
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2013-08-29 12:32:50)
> Justus Winter, le Thu 29 Aug 2013 12:16:11 +0200, a écrit :
> > The patches were also ment to address the complexity^Wsheer size of
> > the code. That is why I wanted to remove them, #ifdef'ing it out has a
> > cost, not a runtime one but for anyone hacking on /hurd/exec.
>
> Yes, the BFD code was making the whole exec code a lot more complex to
> understand. Since even the TODO talks about ditching it away, and
> reviving and maintaining it would be a burden, it's better to just not
> keep it, and have readable exec instead.
Agreed, the BFD stuff was much more intrusive.
> > Out of curiosity, why do you consider this feature interesting?
>
> At least to show flexibility of the exec server. The difference between
> the BFD code and the gzip/bzip2 code is that the latter makes the whole
> exec code complex, while the gzip/bzip2 support only has a couple of
> hooks, so even if the feature doesn't seem so appealing, the maintenance
> cost is light.
But couldn't the same be archived by installing an unzipping storeio
translator on the zipped executable? It is more explicit, but I'd
argue that this is a good thing in this case and shows the flexibility
of the Hurd as a whole.
Justus
Reply to: