Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 2.1.120 - too many errors on the network interfaces | Date | Sun, 20 Sep 1998 12:06:10 -0300 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
In message <m3k92yhm7i.fsf@fred.muc.de>, Andi Kleen writes: +----- | allbery@kf8nh.apk.net (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH) writes: | > them fall short), but it does seem silly that proc doesn't include version | > numbers. Would it really be that painful to have the first line of a /proc | > file be an interface version number? Old utilities that don't know about i | | This is totally unnecessary if you write robust /proc parsers. +--->8
And this helps Alex with his /proc/cpuinfo conundrum exactly how? Robust parsing can only take you so far; it assumes that the contents of /proc are consistent between platforms and Linux revisions. When (not if) they aren't, you have a problem that only a version number can help you deal with sensibly (I should not have to parse 70% of a /proc file to find that it's not actually compatible with what I'm expecting...).
And yes, I'm fully aware of how to do safe line-oriented parsing, although I've been trying to avoid sscanf() as insufficiently robust for the past 6 years.
-- 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/
| |