[Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess
Please, I need know the actual status of OSProcess; what I can wit it and cannot: -Works in main platforms? Mac, Windows Linux? works of same way on all places? -I could execute external executable files? -I could execute commandline tools? -Which will be the next steps of development? -OsProcess will be integrated in Core? -Exists some place with deep doc? Thanks for the help. -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-current-status-of-OSProcess-tp3350744p3350744.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:34:11AM -0800, nullPointer wrote:
Please, I need know the actual status of OSProcess; what I can wit it and cannot:
-Works in main platforms? Mac, Windows Linux? works of same way on all places?
OSProcess works on unix platforms, including Mac and Linux. Windows support is incomplete.
-I could execute external executable files? -I could execute commandline tools?
Yes. You should also load CommandShell in addition to OSProcess.
-Which will be the next steps of development?
Well I probably should get Windows support working one of these days ;)
-OsProcess will be integrated in Core?
No, OSProcess and CommandShell are external packages.
-Exists some place with deep doc?
See class CommandShell, method category "documentation" on the class side, as well as class and method comments throughout. Many classes provide examples, and the unit tests may be helpful for understanding usage. Additional information is at: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/708 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1914 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2153 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6023 Dave
David, i don't remember the outcome of last discussion about it, but i heard some people proposed to add the OSProcess plugin to be built as internal one. Or at least ship it with every VMs, same as FFI plugin. On 12 March 2011 20:53, David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:34:11AM -0800, nullPointer wrote:
Please, I need know the actual status of OSProcess; what I can wit it and cannot:
-Works in main platforms? Mac, Windows Linux? works of same way on all places?
OSProcess works on unix platforms, including Mac and Linux. Windows support is incomplete.
-I could execute external executable files? -I could execute commandline tools?
Yes. You should also load CommandShell in addition to OSProcess.
-Which will be the next steps of development?
Well I probably should get Windows support working one of these days ;)
-OsProcess will be integrated in Core?
No, OSProcess and CommandShell are external packages.
-Exists some place with deep doc?
See class CommandShell, method category "documentation" on the class side, as well as class and method comments throughout. Many classes provide examples, and the unit tests may be helpful for understanding usage.
Additional information is at:
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/708 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1914 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2153 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6023
Dave
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
Hi Igor, I think it is good to make OSPP (and AioPlugin and XDisplayControlPlugin where appropriate) available in all distributed VMs, but in some applications they provide too much access to the operating system, so it is good to have them as external modules so that people who do not want them on the system can delete the modules. So I think it is best to treat it like FFI, it is there if you want it but can be removed if you are doing some sort of application where the user should not have easy access to the OS functions. Dave On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:54:16PM +0100, Igor Stasenko wrote:
David, i don't remember the outcome of last discussion about it, but i heard some people proposed to add the OSProcess plugin to be built as internal one. Or at least ship it with every VMs, same as FFI plugin.
On 12 March 2011 20:53, David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:34:11AM -0800, nullPointer wrote:
Please, I need know the actual status of OSProcess; what I can wit it and cannot:
-Works in main platforms? Mac, Windows Linux? works of same way on all places?
OSProcess works on unix platforms, including Mac and Linux. Windows support is incomplete.
-I could execute external executable files? -I could execute commandline tools?
Yes. You should also load CommandShell in addition to OSProcess.
-Which will be the next steps of development?
Well I probably should get Windows support working one of these days ;)
-OsProcess will be integrated in Core?
No, OSProcess and CommandShell are external packages.
-Exists some place with deep doc?
See class CommandShell, method category "documentation" on the class side, as well as class and method comments throughout. Many classes provide examples, and the unit tests may be helpful for understanding usage.
Additional information is at:
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/708 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1914 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2153 http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6023
Dave
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On 13 March 2011 00:19, David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com> wrote:
Hi Igor,
I think it is good to make OSPP (and AioPlugin and XDisplayControlPlugin where appropriate) available in all distributed VMs, but in some applications they provide too much access to the operating system, so it is good to have them as external modules so that people who do not want them on the system can delete the modules. So I think it is best to treat it like FFI, it is there if you want it but can be removed if you are doing some sort of application where the user should not have easy access to the OS functions.
Well, i think for making a secure 'appliance' sort of, a better approach to not rely on prebuilt VM , but build your own where you can always decide what is secure enough and what's not, and should be removed/disabled. Btw, we discussed a bit of this today with Henrik, and first thing i think people should do, in order to make it more secure is to disable external module loading mechanism. Declaring that standard VM is more secure if you don't ship it with _external_ modules (like FFI) sounds like a joke. So, what i'd like to ask is, that if everyone feel a day-to-day need for using things like FFI or OSProcessPlugin we should make it available by default and out of the box. And for those, who concerned with low security there is always an options to improve it, like hiring people to develop a custom VM based on default one, where all security problems is addressed properly. So, i don't see why we should constrain ourselves with things we use and need, only because in eyes of someone it doesn't looks secure enough.
Dave
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
+1 OSProcess is really important for us. Like a good FFI Stef On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 13 March 2011 00:19, David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com> wrote:
Hi Igor,
I think it is good to make OSPP (and AioPlugin and XDisplayControlPlugin where appropriate) available in all distributed VMs, but in some applications they provide too much access to the operating system, so it is good to have them as external modules so that people who do not want them on the system can delete the modules. So I think it is best to treat it like FFI, it is there if you want it but can be removed if you are doing some sort of application where the user should not have easy access to the OS functions.
Well, i think for making a secure 'appliance' sort of, a better approach to not rely on prebuilt VM , but build your own where you can always decide what is secure enough and what's not, and should be removed/disabled.
Btw, we discussed a bit of this today with Henrik, and first thing i think people should do, in order to make it more secure is to disable external module loading mechanism. Declaring that standard VM is more secure if you don't ship it with _external_ modules (like FFI) sounds like a joke.
So, what i'd like to ask is, that if everyone feel a day-to-day need for using things like FFI or OSProcessPlugin we should make it available by default and out of the box. And for those, who concerned with low security there is always an options to improve it, like hiring people to develop a custom VM based on default one, where all security problems is addressed properly.
So, i don't see why we should constrain ourselves with things we use and need, only because in eyes of someone it doesn't looks secure enough.
Dave
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
+10 We definitely both of them in Moose. Doru On 13 Mar 2011, at 10:46, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
+1
OSProcess is really important for us. Like a good FFI
Stef
On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 13 March 2011 00:19, David T. Lewis <lewis@mail.msen.com> wrote:
Hi Igor,
I think it is good to make OSPP (and AioPlugin and XDisplayControlPlugin where appropriate) available in all distributed VMs, but in some applications they provide too much access to the operating system, so it is good to have them as external modules so that people who do not want them on the system can delete the modules. So I think it is best to treat it like FFI, it is there if you want it but can be removed if you are doing some sort of application where the user should not have easy access to the OS functions.
Well, i think for making a secure 'appliance' sort of, a better approach to not rely on prebuilt VM , but build your own where you can always decide what is secure enough and what's not, and should be removed/disabled.
Btw, we discussed a bit of this today with Henrik, and first thing i think people should do, in order to make it more secure is to disable external module loading mechanism. Declaring that standard VM is more secure if you don't ship it with _external_ modules (like FFI) sounds like a joke.
So, what i'd like to ask is, that if everyone feel a day-to-day need for using things like FFI or OSProcessPlugin we should make it available by default and out of the box. And for those, who concerned with low security there is always an options to improve it, like hiring people to develop a custom VM based on default one, where all security problems is addressed properly.
So, i don't see why we should constrain ourselves with things we use and need, only because in eyes of someone it doesn't looks secure enough.
Dave
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Obvious things are difficult to teach."
+1 ________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Casimiro de Almeida Barreto [casimiro.barreto@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 11:37 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess +1 OSProcess important FFI and/or "Alien running Ok in Linux and Windows" important CdAB Em 13-03-2011 06:46, Stéphane Ducasse escreveu:
+1
OSProcess is really important for us. Like a good FFI
Stef
On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
i added this to issue tracker :) On 14 March 2011 16:54, Schwab,Wilhelm K <bschwab@anest.ufl.edu> wrote:
+1
________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Casimiro de Almeida Barreto [casimiro.barreto@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 11:37 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] The current status of OSProcess
+1
OSProcess important FFI and/or "Alien running Ok in Linux and Windows" important
CdAB
Em 13-03-2011 06:46, Stéphane Ducasse escreveu:
+1
OSProcess is really important for us. Like a good FFI
Stef
On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:11 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
participants (7)
-
Casimiro de Almeida Barreto -
David T. Lewis -
Igor Stasenko -
nullPointer -
Schwab,Wilhelm K -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba