Ext portability question

ruby-talk
1

i've got a little statfs ext which works fine. the man page, however, claim
subtly different struct statfs layouts for different *nixes. what is the
preferred method for dealing with this? the struct is exposed to ruby via a
wrapped struct so the layout actual cannot be abstracted. right now i am
considering:

   arch = Config::CONFIG['arch']

   case arch
     when /linux/
       spit_out_linux_src
     when /sun/
       spit_out_sun_src
     else
       spit_out_posix_src
   end

   create_makefile 'statfs'

in extconf.rb.

another question: these methods __really__ fit into the File class:

   File.statfs path

   file.statfs

how strongly are people opposed to this sort of standard class munging?

cheers.

-a

···

--

EMAIL :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
PHONE :: 303.497.6469
A flower falls, even though we love it; and a weed grows, even though we do
not love it. --Dogen

===============================================================================

2

Hi,

At Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:13:13 +0900,
Ara.T.Howard wrote in [ruby-talk:104311]:

i've got a little statfs ext which works fine. the man page, however, claim
subtly different struct statfs layouts for different *nixes. what is the
preferred method for dealing with this? the struct is exposed to ruby via a
wrapped struct so the layout actual cannot be abstracted. right now i am
considering:

$ ruby18 -v -rmkmf -e 'have_struct_member("struct statfs", "f_blocks", "sys/statfs.h")'
ruby 1.8.2 (2004-06-19) [i686-linux]
checking for struct statfs.f_blocks... yes

···

--
Nobu Nakada

3

"Ara.T.Howard" <Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.60.0406212203340.6817@harp.ngdc.noaa.gov>...

i've got a little statfs ext which works fine.

See "filesystem" by Mike Hall. The RAA entry is outdated (Mike!) so
get the latest at http://users.rcn.com/m3ha11/ruby/ruby.html\.

Regards,

Dan

4

another question: these methods __really__ fit into the File class:

   File.statfs path

   file.statfs

how strongly are people opposed to this sort of standard class munging?

Strongly in favor.

Ari

5

never knew about that one - guess i need to read mkmf! thanks.

-a

···

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:

Hi,

At Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:13:13 +0900,
Ara.T.Howard wrote in [ruby-talk:104311]:

i've got a little statfs ext which works fine. the man page, however, claim
subtly different struct statfs layouts for different *nixes. what is the
preferred method for dealing with this? the struct is exposed to ruby via a
wrapped struct so the layout actual cannot be abstracted. right now i am
considering:

$ ruby18 -v -rmkmf -e 'have_struct_member("struct statfs", "f_blocks", "sys/statfs.h")'
ruby 1.8.2 (2004-06-19) [i686-linux]
checking for struct statfs.f_blocks... yes

--
Nobu Nakada

--

EMAIL :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
PHONE :: 303.497.6469
A flower falls, even though we love it; and a weed grows, even though we do
not love it. --Dogen

===============================================================================

6

thanks daniel - i checked this out but gave up on the dead link too soon.

cheers.

-a

···

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Daniel Berger wrote:

"Ara.T.Howard" <Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.60.0406212203340.6817@harp.ngdc.noaa.gov>...

i've got a little statfs ext which works fine.

See "filesystem" by Mike Hall. The RAA entry is outdated (Mike!) so
get the latest at http://users.rcn.com/m3ha11/ruby/ruby.html\.

Regards,

Dan

--

EMAIL :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
PHONE :: 303.497.6469
A flower falls, even though we love it; and a weed grows, even though we do
not love it. --Dogen

===============================================================================