Re: [sleuthkit-developers] Some questions

[kenshin <ken...@gm...>]

I think that make a shared library witch all the posible code is better than
put
the same code in all files. You could make a libsleuthkit.so with ~1M of
code
If you want small files don't use -g -Wall in gcc :)


> They have the same effect don't they?  Is 'make -C dir' only in GNU
> or is it also in BSD make?

FreeBSD have -C option in make


Other suggestion, I think that open stdin is better that open a file.
For example "fls < ext3fs.img" is better because you could for example
make "bunzip2 -c ext3fs.img.bz2| fls" or other combinations. With this
you have small images and if you have a good cpu you could scan
images faster :)

Thanks to solve my doubts


2006/6/21, Brian Carrier <ca...@sl...>:
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2006, at 7:37 PM, kenshin wrote:
>
> > I'm interesting in develop sleuthkit and I have some questions ...
> >
> > Why do you want to use static executables?
> > Why do you not use shared libraries?
>
> By default, the executables use shared libraries and are not static.
> There is the option for static binaries so that you can use them for
> live analysis and not have to rely on untrusted libraries.
>
> > Why do you use "cd dir; make" instead "make -C dir" ?
>
> They have the same effect don't they?  Is 'make -C dir' only in GNU
> or is it also in BSD make?
>
> > Why have "src/fstools/" filesystems and tools to analyze? I thinks
> > that is better
> > put filesystems in src/fs/ and tools in src/fstools/
>
> Yea, I could separate the library code from the tools one of these days.
>
> > Why do you compile the comand file,md5,sha1? (a normal system have
> > its)
> > Has anyone interesting in reiserfs development?
>
> As someone else said, it forces a consistent version of the tools to
> exist.  Different systems have different output formats.
>
> brian
>
>
>