[Libguestfs] hivexml rewrite

[Alex‎ Nelson]

Hello Richard and the rest of the list,

I've been working on implementing the changes to hivexml Simson noted in this old thread.  Some of the changes could go into the hivex project as it is now (e.g. I've corrected the time calculations).  Some are substantial revisions to the output XML (not just element names), which by silent vote doesn't seem like a big deal.  However, I have one major revision that is difficult to implement (for me, at least) while preserving the multiple language bindings.  I admire the project for having such diverse language support, but I have to change some of the "visitor" function prototypes and that is making development difficult.  (My changes are adding a few structs to track data offsets.)

How important is it to the hivex project that all of the language bindings remain?  If I were to just not develop for, e.g., Perl and OCaml, would it be better to call the revised program "hivex" still, or should the version I'm developing just fork into a slimmer project?

--Alex


On May 7, 2011, at 15:36 , Simson Garfinkel wrote:

> 
> On May 7, 2011, at 6:26 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 06:01:13PM -0400, Simson Garfinkel wrote:
>>> I am writing to you about hivexml.  Richard Jones told me that he
>>> was considering abandoning this program. Instead, I am willing to
>>> take over maintenance of it.
>> 
>> Not sure "abandoning", but I said that the format is broken, the
>> program is broken, and I'd like to deprecate both.
> 
> Ah. Your email to me actually had the word "abandoning" in it. Sorry if I jumped the gun.
> 
>> 
>>> 1. Is anybody using hivexml?
>> 
>> [speaking for me] No.  The regedit format is what we're not using in
>> all the upstream and RHEL tools.
>> 
>>> 2. Is it important to be able to read the old XML format?
>> 
>> [speaking for me] no
> 
> Anybody else?
> 
>> 
>>> 3. We have had a hard time building hivexml on non-RedHat
>>> systems. Is there any objection to my making this a standalone
>>> program?
>> 
>> Go ahead.
>> 
>> I would suggest (just to avoid confusion) you call your program
>> something else instead of 'hivexml'.
> 
> I think that brands have value. If keeping the old name means retaining backwards XML compatibility, I'm happy to do so. Keeping the name is a good thing, I think.
>