[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:0.106 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site