lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: procfs problems
On 15 Apr 1997, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> > Those of you interested in discussing design flaws with the current procfs
> > filesystem, take a look at
> > http://www.anime.net/~goemon/procfs.html
> > I invite comments.

In regards to the "excuse", the data ifconfig uses has changed, so if it
gets fixed "right" I don't see why we can't just do it.

About the differences in /proc/{modules,locks,pci} I don't see how you
could format then all the same. I mean modules has three columns first
and third are variable sizes, locks has 13 columns each followed by a 3
column row and pci, well, it doesn't begin to fit in any column/row scheme.
I would think similar data should have the same format, but
/proc/{modules,locks,pci} doesn't qualify in my book.
> Well regarding your /proc/cpuinfo format, I think we could fix this
> problem by just making sure that the very first line of the cpuinfo
> holds the port name.
>
> Something like:
>
> /proc/cpuinfo:
> port : {i386,alpha,sparc,ppc,mips}

I would defiantly disagree in this part. Putting arch instead of port
would be ok. I think technically speaking i386 isn't a port of linux,
because it started there.

> And then, if people want to parse any of the extra information, they
> should know the architecture specific information on the CPU before
> attempting to parse it.



+---------------------------------+
| David Fries |
| dfries@mail.win.org |
+---------------------------------+

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans