Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:32:33 +0000 (GMT) | | From | Matthew Kirkwood <> | | Subject | Re: /proc cleanup proposal |
| |
On 7 Mar 2000 jmcmullan@linuxcare.com wrote:
> With a major number change, we can blow away the current /proc > structure, and replace it with something that works...
Why is it more acceptable to break large amount of userspace code just because of a major version change?
Yes, current /proc is a little ugly (internally[0] and externally) doesn't mean that it doesn't work. I'm slightly biased because I didn't have to write "ps" , but the current /proc works fine for my purposes and, I suspect, most peoples'.
> Just off the top of my head, I'd like to see this major stucture > (names can be changed if needed, it's the structure that counts) [..]
A generic interface might seem a nice idea, but are we really going to add enough buses (with worthwhile /proc interfaces) to make a proc_bus_register() really worthwhile?
Matthew.
[0] Though I haven't really looked at the tidier state in 2.3
- 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/
|  |