> On Wed, 2014-05-07 at 08:39 -0400, Bruno Lauzé wrote: >> One thing I feel FreeBSD always ignored is instrumentation frameworks. >> I am talking about wbem, cim model and implementation like OpenPegasus. Why is that? >> I ported OpenPegasus to work in FreeBSD with few patches. >> However, of course without providers a wbem doesn't go far. I started to see how to shape providers for freebsd at: >> >> github.com/brunolauze/openpegasus-providers >> >> my openpegasus port is at: >> >> github.com/brunolauze/freebsd-ports/tree/master/net-mgmt/openpegasus >> >> >> Apple ships a wbem >> Microsoft ships a wbem / non-standard >> RedHat ships it. >> Suse ships it. >> z/OS ships it. >> Ubuntu and distro-like ships it. >> And Solaris does also. >> >> Why not us? >> >> The advantage outside of this idea is better coding technique and design to expose API first and utility based on those APIs. >> if any utility can be used as API, this discard the need for application to use system() or popen() to execute shell code to accomplish system tasks, which is really bad but widely widespread in lack of good API exposure of those utilities. This reduce a lot of error with changes in utilities switches, etc. and mitigate security risks. >> >> Wouldn't it be great to query FreeBSD with queries like: >> select * from UNIX_DiskDrive where Storage_Capacity> 1000 >> or >> select * from UNIX_SCSIController WHERE LastErrorCode <> 0 >> >> >> Anyway, this is just to talk, let me know your opinions! >> >> >> >> > > Are you going to propose updates/new ports for these tools? > > sean > Well, like I mentioned, it's pretty useless to publish my port of openpegasus if there's no effort to develop providers for FreeBSD. A task that I started working on when time permits it. My point was to see what people in FreeBSD community thinks about this, about instrumentation and OS exposure to this standard.Received on Fri May 09 2014 - 12:30:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:49 UTC