lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: /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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans