Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Sep 1999 19:36:13 +0100 | From | Steve Dodd <> | Subject | Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports... |
| |
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 10:44:57AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Steve Dodd <dirk@loth.demon.co.uk> writes:
[cpuinfo] > |> Would it not be more sensible to introduce a syscall or some such thing to > |> do it?
> How about extending sysinfo(2)?
Without looking at it, what I think would be sensible is something that's a read-only version of the sysctl stuff -- so we have a syscall, /and/ simply formatted files in proc (probably just a single value per file). That way the glibc people are happ(y|ier), and Mr. parsons can sit around attempting to eliminate fork bombs by reading unchangeable values from files in /proc <g>
-- "His mind is like a steel trap -- full of mice"
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |