Re: [9fans] Git/fs: Possibly Usable

[Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1650 bytes --]

I now realize there are two different libavl's.  It's easy enough to copy
from 9front repo (hopefully there are no cascading dependencies).

9front maintainers, can anyone speak to technical reasons for creating a
new version rather than fixing existing? Also, any thoughts on changing the
name slightly so they can both be on the same system? maybe libAVL?

Thanks,
-Skip

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 1:23 PM Ori Bernstein <ori@eigenstate.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 11:29:30 -0700
> Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The avl library doesn't match up to 9legacy version. Any ideas?
>
> Looking at a few options. I can just say "well, patch it", but it'd
> be nice to see the various plan9s playing better with each other.
>
> There are a few options. The easy ones:
>
>         - I can bundle the 9front libavl in git9.
>         - I can remove the libavl usage, possibly replacing with
>           the objset implementation I already have.
>
> The harder ones:
>
>         - 9front can provide compatibility with 9legacy libavl
>         - 9legacy can adopt the 9front libavl API.
>
> The first two are easy. The other two involve herding cats,
> but would make it possible for more code to be shared. Given
> how few people are actually writing code on plan 9, it would
> be nice to share what is there.
>
> Right now, I'm leaning towards the second option, because all
> I really use libavl for is a key-value lookup.
>
> > BTW, I think your notes on this message are a great start for a README.
>
> Already done.
>
> --
> Ori Bernstein <ori@eigenstate.org>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2261 bytes --]