Subject: Re: Additional features for veriexecgen(8)
To: None <>
From: David Young <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 10/09/2006 15:53:51
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 09:30:41PM +0200, Elad Efrat wrote:
> David,
> I strongly object to your suggestions below.
> The idea behind veriexecgen's design, which I asked Matt to follow, is
> simplicity. It's no secret that it duplicates other utilities'
> "intelligence" -- in fact, that was the purpose when I suggested we
> replace the shell-script with a C program. Your idea is a *serious*
> regression in that regard, and in fact make the tool even less usable
> than it was as a script.

Elad, my proposal does not entail any regression.  The script that would
invoke veriexecgen could understand all of the same flags.  I thought
that much would be understood.  Sorry I was not clear.

The performance that M J mentions is certainly important.  I believe
performance of find | veriexecgen would be alike to veriexecgen itself
on most of my servers, but they have lots of memory dedicated to inode
caching, and not every server does.


David Young             OJC Technologies      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933