[Toybox] About 2/3 of mount checked in.

[Rob Landley]

On 06/03/14 16:40, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 07:19:55AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
>> It's got basic flag parsing and is autodetecting bind and loopback
>> mounts, but no support for remount or fstab yet.
>  
> Neat!
> mount is the last bit of what I needed for setting up a small rootfs;
> I didn't want to submit in-tree documentation until everything needed
> was in a usable state.

I've meant to do it forever, just been a bit overwhelmed with everything
else. :)

>> You may notice the new xpopen() infrastructure in lib, which shells out
>> to an xexec() with stdin/stdout/stderr captured via pipes. That's a
>> thing I've needed for a while so we can fork and call other local
>> commands without needing an exec. (Doesn't do xexec_optargs() but I
>> haven't thought of a case needing i/o capture for that yet.)
> 
> Is this going to be part of the plumbing for decompression?
> (I seem to recollect talk about using fork & xexec with pipes to handle
> stuff like decompressing tarballs...)

Yeah, most likely.

This would make tar hard to use within uboot or similar, but the "common
case" here is android, and someday I hope to see a public domain
bootloader implementing about what linux 0.0.1 had (basic syscalls,
round robin scheduler, etc).

>> I need to update the documentation. I'm getting to the point where
>> there's enough material I might need separate tutorial and reference
>> versions, except keeping duplicate copies of the same information in
>> sync is never fun. Maybe I can leverage toys/example harder...
>>
>> Rob
> 
> I've been wondering if there should be more things in there myself.

I know there _should_ be, the question is what. :)

>> (It's singular/plural names that really screw me up. lib is singular,
>> scripts is plural, toys is plural, toys/example is singular... Sigh. I
>> can never remember if various websites have "download" or "downloads",
>> but then my own website has "writing" singular "and "talks" plural...)
> 
> Just to be pedantic: isn't lib collective? ;)
> At first I occasionally typo'd toys/example as toys/examples, but it's
> not really worthy of a change as far as I can tell.
> (Reminds me of a comment about how _change_, without a justification, is
> not good, nor even neutral: learning the new approach is a real cost.)

Indeed. Not worth the churn. Just annoyed at myself for leaving a rough
edge.

> Thanks,
> Isaac Dunham

Rob

 1401885952.0