From: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
To: John Soo <jsoo1@asu.edu>
Cc: 44460@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: [bug#44460] Add copyright lines
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 21:29:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871rgyiajk.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87361eoabg.fsf@asu.edu> (John Soo's message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2020 07:37:39 -0800")
Hi,
John Soo <jsoo1@asu.edu> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>> * Still not normalized - how can I search for just the child processes
>>> associated with a particular command?
>>
>> Like:
>>
>> guix processes | recsel -e 'ClientCommand ~ "xyz"' -p ChildProcess
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Actually what does “normalized” mean in this context?
>
> Excellent question. I was thinking along the lines of database
> normalization. The default output has multi-valued fields for child
> processes, so the idea is to make them their own record set. Does that
> make sense?
Yes it does! Initially I wondered if it was a term used in recutils,
but apparently it’s not.
> An aside - Probably to be entirely honest about normalizing the output,
> locks really would be in a separate record set too.
Yeah.
> Another challenge is making sure the user can understand what
> "normalized" means. I am not sure readers of the manual/cli help will
> be able to infer what it means from context. On the other hand, it is
> such a small use case that it seems imbalanced to provide a lot of
> background for the term "normal". What do you think?
Sure.
Thinking more about it, to me the appeal of recutils is that it’s both
human- and machine-readable. But here we end up having a specific
machine-readable variant. But yeah, maybe that’s unavoidable.
>>> I wouldn't be opposed to splitting ChildProcess into ChildPID and
>>> ChildCommand. I would like it best if that change was made in addition
>>> to adding the normalized version, since the normalized version allows
>>> more functionality.
>>
>> I would think it’s OK to break compatibility on just these
>> “ChildProcess” fields.
>
> Ok. Would it be ok if I put that in a separate commit?
Yes (you mean in addition to ‘-f normalized’, right?).
Thanks,
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-12 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-05 4:31 [bug#44460] [PATCH] processes: Optionally normalize recutils output John Soo
2020-11-05 15:49 ` [bug#44460] processes: Don't normalize Locks John Soo
2020-11-05 16:01 ` [bug#44460] Fixup the output of Session John Soo
2020-11-06 23:34 ` [bug#44460] Add copyright lines John Soo
2020-11-10 22:15 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-11 17:51 ` John Soo
2020-11-11 17:59 ` John Soo
2020-11-11 18:47 ` John Soo
2020-11-12 10:58 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-11-12 15:37 ` John Soo
2020-11-12 20:29 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
2020-11-13 5:33 ` John Soo
2020-11-13 16:16 ` John Soo
2020-11-29 22:49 ` bug#44460: " Ludovic Courtès
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871rgyiajk.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=44460@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=jsoo1@asu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).