Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.1.120 - too many errors on the network interfaces | Date | Sun, 20 Sep 1998 11:29:27 -0300 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
In message <Pine.LNX.4.02.9809201010140.15506-100000@tahallah.demon.co.uk>, Ale x Buell writes: +----- | On Sun, 20 Sep 1998, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: | > Dunno about ioctl (I've seen lots of schemes proposed and used, and | > all of them fall short), but it does seem silly that proc doesn't | > include version numbers. Would it really be that painful to have the | | I have had some problems parsing /proc/cpuinfos on different | architectures. I hope you have seen my message about it earlier today. +--->8
I did, in fact it was another reason that I posted the above. Consistent interfaces as suggested are well, fine, and good, but (XthreadX with UDI) you can't always maintain interface consistency when that interface is broken, as with the dev->flush() changes. And /proc/cpuinfo strikes me as an interface which may well have problems being simultaneously consistent and complete while addressing multiple CPU architecture families (heck, it's been a problem just between Intel, AMD, and Cyrix; should we be surprised at problems between x86 and PPC, Alpha, SPARC, ...?).
-- brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering KF8NH carnegie mellon university
- 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/
| |