[systemd-devel] split util.[ch] ?

[Ronny Chevalier]

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Lennart Poettering
<lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10.04.15 18:19, Ronny Chevalier (chevalier.ronny at gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Every time src/shared/util.h is modified nearly all systemd code base
>> needs to be rebuilt, since it is included in lots of files (402/1029)
>>
>> I think it would be great to split util.[ch] in multiple files (like
>> with copy.c, file-io.c, ...), and I think there is plenty of functions
>> that can be moved away of util.c.
>> - util-escape: Functions related to escaping
>> - util-string: Functions/macros like streq, strempty, endswith,...
>> - util-process: Functions that fetch process information
>> - util-safe: Functions that convert string to i64, u64, li, u16,...
>> - util-random: Functions to get random bytes, u64,...
>> - util-terminal: Functions/macros related to terminals/tty
>> - [...]
>>
>> What do you think?
>> Is it worth it?
>
> Yeah, we probably should do that.
>
> But so far we called those split out files foo-util.h rather than
> util-foo.h, and we should probably stick to that:

Sure

>
> $ ls src/shared/*util*.h
> src/shared/acl-util.h src/shared/cgroup-util.h src/shared/fstab-util.h
> src/shared/in-addr-util.h src/shared/path-util.h
> src/shared/socket-util.h src/shared/util.h src/shared/apparmor-util.h
> src/shared/clock-util.h src/shared/fw-util.h src/shared/locale-util.h
> src/shared/seccomp-util.h src/shared/sysctl-util.h
> src/shared/blkid-util.h src/shared/env-util.h src/shared/ima-util.h
> src/shared/memfd-util.h src/shared/selinux-util.h
> src/shared/time-util.h src/shared/btrfs-util.h
> src/shared/ether-addr-util.h src/shared/import-util.h
> src/shared/nss-util.h src/shared/smack-util.h src/shared/udev-util.h
>
> And I'd prefer to split this out slowly. For now I think having
> process-util.[ch], random-util.[ch] and terminal-util.[ch] would make
> sense, and we can look into the rest afterwards?
>
> (simply because the lines between string handling, escaping strings
> and parsing strings is so blurry...)
>

Yes, it makes sense.

Ronny