On 21/02/12 16:05, Diego Biurrun wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 03:59:34PM +0200, Miika Komu wrote:On 02/21/2012 03:24 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote:review needs-info On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 08:34:18AM +0000, Xin wrote:Xin has proposed merging lp:~hipl-core/hipl/libhip into lp:hipl. Libhip merge proposal: The libhip branch mainly aims to provide a convenient way for system test of HIPL without full installation and configuration. In addition to this purpose, it also provides a socket API alike library approach for application to use HIP. Last by not least, since vanilla Linux TCP does not yet support long periods of disconnectivity  , libhip can be a solution in this condition. In the libhip branch, we build a library version of HIP for upper applications, which only exposes traditional socket like API. when using the libhip, hip control messages are transmitted over TCP or UDP, which is similar to TLS/DTLS but we have a unified protocol to handle both datagram and streaming traffic. Compared to TLS/DTLS, this is a big advantage and it may be better use case for HIP. In the libhip, most of code of hipd has been moved to lib/hipdaemon which then becomes a library for both hipd and libhip. By this way, the libhip can reuse the code of hipd to the max extend. This is also the reason why libhip can be a system test approach for hipd, especially in the process of base exchange, the libhip and hipd share the same code base. Meanwhile, the hip daemon, and other functionalities previous exist in the trunk, are kept unchanged and functioning after this merge.Why is the library called libhipdaemon?would something else (e.g. "lib/hipl" and "libhipl") be more suitable?Is it a library for creating hip-related daemon programs? If no, why is there "daemon" in the name?
The previous codes of hipd has been packed into this library, perhaps that's reason of using "libhipdaemon" as its name? Well, I don't know more about this naming history, but "libhipl" sounds fine for me.