[lkml]   [1997]   [Feb]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Machine friendly format for /proc files
> On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, Snow Cat wrote:
> > Wouldn't ioctl support for /proc files be more logical?
> You've got my vote for that. Its fine for a human to browse through /proc,
> but programs shouldn't have to rely on the format of /proc file entries to
> work properly - for the simple reason that its WASTEFUL to convert binary
> information to text just to convert the text back to binary in order to
> use it, not to mention any file descriptors opened in the process.

Actual, historically, programs like ps and top groveled around kernel
structures, reading kernel memory to figure out what was going on.

One of the reason for the /proc file system is it makes things very
easy to examine, and the applications doesn't have to be setguid kmem.

If you define a special ioctl, you still need something special, in
which case why don't you just grovel around kernel structures.

You **could** make a top which reads the kernel structures (some ports do).

Member of the League for Programming Freedom

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [W:0.095 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site