[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Many questions about translators

From: Carl Fredrik Hammar
Subject: Re: Many questions about translators
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:35:49 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)


On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 04:17:17AM +0200, olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:52:04AM +0200, Carl Fredrik Hammar wrote:
> > Yes, a translator can attach itself to multiple nodes, but if a
> > translator takes an active role in attaching itself it cannot be set
> > as a passive (start on demand) translator.
> Eh? Why not?...

I worded that too strongly...

I don't like the idea of e.g. settrans <target> hpm <interface>, because
it would be tricky to handle moving or deleting the interface node.
For some reason I didn't think it through that my suggestion would just
move the problem to the interface , e.g.  settrans <target> hpm; settrans
<interface> hpm-interface <target>.  Still it seems more natural to me.

> > It is also possible to forward the actual startup request from the
> > interface translator to the target translator, which would then take
> > over the node, leaving you with a single running translator.  I'm not
> > sure I'd recommend this approach though.
> Again, why not?

Again, it seems like a natural split to me.  One translator per
filesystem: one to merge the different packages into a single filesystem,
and the other to interact with it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]