Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » DSDP - Target Management » Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes
Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #3061] Tue, 16 January 2007 09:24 Go to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: turesheim.atmel.com

Hi all,

I've been extending "org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes" by adding a new
declaration for my target system. This only supports SSH shells and FTP
files at the time, so one reason for creating the extension was to limit
the user choice. However when I investigate I find that the relation
between the system and subsystem is specified in
the "org.eclipse.rse.ui.subsystemConfigurations" extension point. Am I
missing something or does this mean that I have to create my own SSH and
FTP subsystem declarations nearly identical to the existing ones in order
to provide support for these in my system?

Maybe it would be better to specify which subsystems a system supports in
another extension point or in the system extension point itself?
--
Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
Senior Design Engineer
Atmel Norway AS
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #4095 is a reply to message #3061] Tue, 16 January 2007 18:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Martin Oberhuber is currently offline Martin Oberhuber
Messages: 983
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Torkild,

correct: currently you also need to create extensions for
subsystemConfigurations in plugin.xml, in order to bind NEW
specification of subsystems to your systemType. The extensions can
re-use existing classes for the actual subsystem impl.

For RSE 2.0, we are considering extensions to the systemTypes extension
point, and yes we are also considering an additional "binding" kind of
extension that simply creates the association between existing
subsystemConfigurations and a new systemType (plan item: systemType
enhancements). Or, associate existing service implementations with a
systemType in a more dynamic way (the corresponding plan item is "make
rse more service oriented").

Keep in mind, though, that some implementations of a subsystem may act
differently depending on the systemType they are registered against --
for dstore, there are lots of "if (systemType=="Windows")" kinds of
queries in the code. So, binding a working subsystemConfiguration
against a new systemType can have strange results. That's why I find the
current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm


Torkild Ulvøy Resheim wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been extending "org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes" by adding a new
> declaration for my target system. This only supports SSH shells and FTP
> files at the time, so one reason for creating the extension was to limit
> the user choice. However when I investigate I find that the relation
> between the system and subsystem is specified in
> the "org.eclipse.rse.ui.subsystemConfigurations" extension point. Am I
> missing something or does this mean that I have to create my own SSH and
> FTP subsystem declarations nearly identical to the existing ones in order
> to provide support for these in my system?
>
> Maybe it would be better to specify which subsystems a system supports in
> another extension point or in the system extension point itself?
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #4151 is a reply to message #4095] Tue, 16 January 2007 19:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: torkildr.resheim.no

Hi Martin

Thank you for taking your time.

Martin Oberhuber wrote:

> Hi Torkild,
>
> correct: currently you also need to create extensions for
> subsystemConfigurations in plugin.xml, in order to bind NEW
> specification of subsystems to your systemType. The extensions can
> re-use existing classes for the actual subsystem impl.
Ok.
>
> For RSE 2.0, we are considering extensions to the systemTypes extension
> point, and yes we are also considering an additional "binding" kind of
> extension that simply creates the association between existing
> subsystemConfigurations and a new systemType (plan item: systemType
> enhancements). Or, associate existing service implementations with a
> systemType in a more dynamic way (the corresponding plan item is "make
> rse more service oriented").
Cool, I think that it is a good idea to "loosen" the design.
>
> Keep in mind, though, that some implementations of a subsystem may act
> differently depending on the systemType they are registered against --
> for dstore, there are lots of "if (systemType=="Windows")" kinds of
> queries in the code. So, binding a working subsystemConfiguration
> against a new systemType can have strange results. That's why I find the
Ok, I will peruse the code to see if something has a chance of breaking. I
did some more testing earlier today and found that everything does work
nicely. We have a different view on targets than RSE so we also have our
own target management system. However when doing a (modified) remote launch
on one of these targets an automatically created RSE system is used. This
is automatically created or updated when the target configuration is
changed. We could have just used the subsystem services but figured it
would be a good idea to let the user take full benefit of RSE.

> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.
I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP support
so the idea was to reuse what was already there.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Martin Oberhuber
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
> http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
[snip]


Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
triggered my interest in RSE :-)
--
Med vennlig hilsen / Kind regards
Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #4220 is a reply to message #4151] Wed, 17 January 2007 19:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Martin Oberhuber is currently offline Martin Oberhuber
Messages: 983
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
>> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
>> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
>> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.

> I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP support
> so the idea was to reuse what was already there.

If you just need SSH and FTP you'd be fine -- these do not depend on the
system type in any way, at least currently (in the future, it would be
nice if we could probe the remote to see if it is e.g. case sensitive,
case preserving or case insensitive. It's part of being more service
oriented and more dynamic).

> Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
> triggered my interest in RSE :-)

Thanks, you're welcome -- though it wasn't me who held that presentation
but a coworker of mine (Michael Scharf).

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #4287 is a reply to message #4220] Wed, 17 January 2007 20:10 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: torkildr.resheim.no

Hi Martin,

Martin Oberhuber wrote:

>>> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
>>> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
>>> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the
>>> other.
>
>> I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP
>> support so the idea was to reuse what was already there.
>
> If you just need SSH and FTP you'd be fine -- these do not depend on the
> system type in any way, at least currently (in the future, it would be
> nice if we could probe the remote to see if it is e.g. case sensitive,
> case preserving or case insensitive. It's part of being more service
> oriented and more dynamic).
Ok. That would be nice. I'm certain that many others will find uses for FTP,
SSH, terminals et cetera, that are not any way connected to scope of DSDP.
>
>> Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
>> triggered my interest in RSE :-)
>
> Thanks, you're welcome -- though it wasn't me who held that presentation
> but a coworker of mine (Michael Scharf).
Doh, I need a memory upgrade.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Martin Oberhuber
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
> http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

Thank you for your help.
--
Med vennlig hilsen / Kind regards
Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #565611 is a reply to message #3061] Tue, 16 January 2007 18:26 Go to previous message
Martin Oberhuber is currently offline Martin Oberhuber
Messages: 983
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
Hi Torkild,

correct: currently you also need to create extensions for
subsystemConfigurations in plugin.xml, in order to bind NEW
specification of subsystems to your systemType. The extensions can
re-use existing classes for the actual subsystem impl.

For RSE 2.0, we are considering extensions to the systemTypes extension
point, and yes we are also considering an additional "binding" kind of
extension that simply creates the association between existing
subsystemConfigurations and a new systemType (plan item: systemType
enhancements). Or, associate existing service implementations with a
systemType in a more dynamic way (the corresponding plan item is "make
rse more service oriented").

Keep in mind, though, that some implementations of a subsystem may act
differently depending on the systemType they are registered against --
for dstore, there are lots of "if (systemType=="Windows")" kinds of
queries in the code. So, binding a working subsystemConfiguration
against a new systemType can have strange results. That's why I find the
current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm


Torkild Ulvøy Resheim wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been extending "org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes" by adding a new
> declaration for my target system. This only supports SSH shells and FTP
> files at the time, so one reason for creating the extension was to limit
> the user choice. However when I investigate I find that the relation
> between the system and subsystem is specified in
> the "org.eclipse.rse.ui.subsystemConfigurations" extension point. Am I
> missing something or does this mean that I have to create my own SSH and
> FTP subsystem declarations nearly identical to the existing ones in order
> to provide support for these in my system?
>
> Maybe it would be better to specify which subsystems a system supports in
> another extension point or in the system extension point itself?
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #565660 is a reply to message #4095] Tue, 16 January 2007 19:12 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: torkildr.resheim.no

Hi Martin

Thank you for taking your time.

Martin Oberhuber wrote:

> Hi Torkild,
>
> correct: currently you also need to create extensions for
> subsystemConfigurations in plugin.xml, in order to bind NEW
> specification of subsystems to your systemType. The extensions can
> re-use existing classes for the actual subsystem impl.
Ok.
>
> For RSE 2.0, we are considering extensions to the systemTypes extension
> point, and yes we are also considering an additional "binding" kind of
> extension that simply creates the association between existing
> subsystemConfigurations and a new systemType (plan item: systemType
> enhancements). Or, associate existing service implementations with a
> systemType in a more dynamic way (the corresponding plan item is "make
> rse more service oriented").
Cool, I think that it is a good idea to "loosen" the design.
>
> Keep in mind, though, that some implementations of a subsystem may act
> differently depending on the systemType they are registered against --
> for dstore, there are lots of "if (systemType=="Windows")" kinds of
> queries in the code. So, binding a working subsystemConfiguration
> against a new systemType can have strange results. That's why I find the
Ok, I will peruse the code to see if something has a chance of breaking. I
did some more testing earlier today and found that everything does work
nicely. We have a different view on targets than RSE so we also have our
own target management system. However when doing a (modified) remote launch
on one of these targets an automatically created RSE system is used. This
is automatically created or updated when the target configuration is
changed. We could have just used the subsystem services but figured it
would be a good idea to let the user take full benefit of RSE.

> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.
I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP support
so the idea was to reuse what was already there.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Martin Oberhuber
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
> http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
[snip]


Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
triggered my interest in RSE :-)
--
Med vennlig hilsen / Kind regards
Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #565677 is a reply to message #4151] Wed, 17 January 2007 19:57 Go to previous message
Martin Oberhuber is currently offline Martin Oberhuber
Messages: 983
Registered: July 2009
Senior Member
>> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
>> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
>> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the other.

> I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP support
> so the idea was to reuse what was already there.

If you just need SSH and FTP you'd be fine -- these do not depend on the
system type in any way, at least currently (in the future, it would be
nice if we could probe the remote to see if it is e.g. case sensitive,
case preserving or case insensitive. It's part of being more service
oriented and more dynamic).

> Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
> triggered my interest in RSE :-)

Thanks, you're welcome -- though it wasn't me who held that presentation
but a coworker of mine (Michael Scharf).

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
Re: Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes [message #565709 is a reply to message #4220] Wed, 17 January 2007 20:10 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: torkildr.resheim.no

Hi Martin,

Martin Oberhuber wrote:

>>> current way things work not too bad in the first place -- if you
>>> register an existing subsystem against a new systemType, there is good
>>> chance that you'll need to change the subsystem in some way or the
>>> other.
>
>> I was hoping to avoid that. We need nothing but standard SSH and FTP
>> support so the idea was to reuse what was already there.
>
> If you just need SSH and FTP you'd be fine -- these do not depend on the
> system type in any way, at least currently (in the future, it would be
> nice if we could probe the remote to see if it is e.g. case sensitive,
> case preserving or case insensitive. It's part of being more service
> oriented and more dynamic).
Ok. That would be nice. I'm certain that many others will find uses for FTP,
SSH, terminals et cetera, that are not any way connected to scope of DSDP.
>
>> Btw: Thank you for the presentation at Eclipse Summit. It was what really
>> triggered my interest in RSE :-)
>
> Thanks, you're welcome -- though it wasn't me who held that presentation
> but a coworker of mine (Michael Scharf).
Doh, I need a memory upgrade.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Martin Oberhuber
> Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
> http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

Thank you for your help.
--
Med vennlig hilsen / Kind regards
Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
Previous Topic:Extending org.eclipse.rse.core.systemTypes
Next Topic:TM Terminal View -> Serial Connection Port Problem
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Sep 22 10:15:41 GMT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.06127 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.2.
Copyright ©2001-2010 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software