[lkml]   [1997]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: procfs problems
    Mark H. Wood writes ...
    > On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Evan Jeffrey wrote:
    > > Stefan Monnier said:
    > [deletia]
    > > >Of course, I'd also love to see the /system/info directory be
    > > >organised. Ideally, the content of each and every file would be in a standard
    > > >(and binary, but I'm sure string-lovers will jump at me right here) format
    > Oooh! ASN.1 anyone?
    > > >with library functions to turn those binary streams into strings (and a
    > > >corresponding bin2text programs for those who want to replace
    > > >"cat /proc/cpuinfo" by "bin2text /system/info/cpu"). That standard format woul
    > >
    > > Not binary! This is something I really do object to. The whole point of
    > > /proc is to provide system/process info in a human readable format. I also
    > I think here lies part of the problem. There are two camps: one thinks
    > that /proc is meant to be human-readable, and programs trying to parse it
    > are on their own; the other thinks that /proc is meant to be
    > machine-readable and that humans should write prettyprinter programs if
    > they want it nicely formatted for the eye. Isn't there some way to
    > reconcile the two views, or at least settle which one is correct?

    While I remember, /dev/sndstat really should be in /proc since it isn't a
    device at all. On the other hand, manybe all the non-process stuff in /proc
    should move to /dev/status/...

    Tim Hollebeek | Disclaimer :=> Everything above is a true statement,
    Electron Psychologist | for sufficiently false values of true.
    Princeton University | email:
    ----------------------| (NEW! IMPROVED!)

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.018 / U:95.776 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site