Advanced
Mailing List Archive

Mailing List Archive

  1. Home >
  2. Varnish>
  3. Dev
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi
phk at phk
Mar 14, 2006, 1:14 AM
Post #1 of 6 (1657 views)
Permalink
I'm slightly confused here,

I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
stuff).

But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?

Who of us have a sign error here ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi [ In reply to ]
phk at phk
Mar 14, 2006, 1:14 AM
Post #2 of 6 (1634 views)
Permalink
I'm slightly confused here,

I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
stuff).

But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?

Who of us have a sign error here ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi [ In reply to ]
des at linpro
Mar 14, 2006, 1:55 AM
Post #3 of 6 (1633 views)
Permalink
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
> I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
> software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
> library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
> stuff).
>
> But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
> varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?
>
> Who of us have a sign error here ?

I didn't want to split up the log code into reading and writing parts,
so I put everything in libvarnishapi. I'm not happy with it, though,
so I think I'll move the varnish_debug and varnish_log over to
libvarnish and split up varnish_log.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi [ In reply to ]
des at linpro
Mar 14, 2006, 1:55 AM
Post #4 of 6 (1635 views)
Permalink
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
> I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
> software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
> library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
> stuff).
>
> But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
> varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?
>
> Who of us have a sign error here ?

I didn't want to split up the log code into reading and writing parts,
so I put everything in libvarnishapi. I'm not happy with it, though,
so I think I'll move the varnish_debug and varnish_log over to
libvarnish and split up varnish_log.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi [ In reply to ]
phk at phk
Mar 14, 2006, 2:03 AM
Post #5 of 6 (1633 views)
Permalink
In message <ujry7zdbe2o.fsf at cat.linpro.no>, Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= writes:
>"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
>> I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
>> software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
>> library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
>> stuff).
>>
>> But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
>> varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?
>>
>> Who of us have a sign error here ?
>
>I didn't want to split up the log code into reading and writing parts,
>so I put everything in libvarnishapi. I'm not happy with it, though,
>so I think I'll move the varnish_debug and varnish_log over to
>libvarnish and split up varnish_log.

Most of the sharing will be in a .h file anyway wouldn't it ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
libvarnish vs libvarnishapi [ In reply to ]
phk at phk
Mar 14, 2006, 2:03 AM
Post #6 of 6 (1629 views)
Permalink
In message <ujry7zdbe2o.fsf at cat.linpro.no>, Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= writes:
>"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk at phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
>> I thought libvarnishapi was the library that will expose API's for 3rd party
>> software (stuff like reading the shmem log etc) and libvarnish was the
>> library the varnish process(es) would get linked against (containing internal
>> stuff).
>>
>> But I see in the tree now that varnish_debug.c varnish_log.c and
>> varnish_util.c lives in libvarnishapi not libvarnish ?
>>
>> Who of us have a sign error here ?
>
>I didn't want to split up the log code into reading and writing parts,
>so I put everything in libvarnishapi. I'm not happy with it, though,
>so I think I'll move the varnish_debug and varnish_log over to
>libvarnish and split up varnish_log.

Most of the sharing will be in a .h file anyway wouldn't it ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

©2024 GT.net. A Gossamer Threads company.
5th Floor, 455 Granville St., Vancouver, BC V6C 1T1, Canada | Legal