lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: How about a /proc/patches ?
On Wed, Feb 25, 1998 at 02:30:20PM -0500, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>
> Second: I took a look at it, and decided the /proc/patches entry wasn't
> necessary, as the same info was available from dmesg anyway. However, the
> /proc/config file could be very useful, and it doesn't look like it adds
> much code to the kernel. So my recommendation would be to keep

Well, then get rid of /proc/scsi/scsi as well since it's in dmesg.

> /proc/patches and /proc/config and ditch print_patches() at startup.
> [can you format /proc/config as closely as possible to .config, so that
> modules/programs that are used to scanning /usr/src/linux/.config for info
> can redirect their search easily to /proc/config instead? Alternatively
> it could look like include/linux/autoconf.h instead.]

I think .config would be a could match to use.

--
[======================================================================]
[ Kevin Lentin Email: K.Lentin@cs.monash.edu.au ]
[ finger kevinl@fangorn.cs.monash.edu.au for PGP public key block. ]
[ KeyId: 06808EED FingerPrint: 6024308DE1F84314 811B511DBA6FD596 ]
[======================================================================]

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.066 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site