Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: procfs problems | Date | Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:06:01 -0500 | From | Evan Jeffrey <> |
| |
Stefan Monnier said:
>If someone wants to "restructure" procfs, wouldn't it make more sense to turn >it into "kernelfs" or "systemfs" (typically mounted on /system) and have > > /proc -> /system/proc > /dev/fd -> /system/fd > /dev/scd0 -> /system/devices/scsi0/target6/lun0
People are going to scream bloody murder about that. It breaks a lot of stuff. OTOH, whatever we do to /proc is going to break some stuff.
>Of course, I'd also love to see the /system/info directory be >organised. Ideally, the content of each and every file would be in a standard >(and binary, but I'm sure string-lovers will jump at me right here) format >with library functions to turn those binary streams into strings (and a >corresponding bin2text programs for those who want to replace >"cat /proc/cpuinfo" by "bin2text /system/info/cpu"). That standard format woul
Not binary! This is something I really do object to. The whole point of /proc is to provide system/process info in a human readable format. I also thing the complications of mixing text and binary in an intelligent manner will cause either unnecissary complexity, or eliminate any advantages as far as simplicity for userland programs.
Evan Jeffrey ejeffrey@eliot82.wustl.edu
| |