[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5 PROPOSAL: Replacement for current /proc of shit.
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:06:00 +0100
Tim Jansen <> wrote:

> On Thursday 01 November 2001 11:32, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > I believe that rewriting /proc (and /proc/sys should simply die) is a
> > better solution than extending the interface, or avoiding it
> > altogether by using a new filesystem.
> I am currently working on something like this, too. It's using Patrick
> Mochel's driverfs patch
> (
> as a base and adds the functionality of the extensions that I did to proc fs
> for my device registry patch
> (

Hi Tim!

Firstly: obviously, I think that work on /proc is a worthy and excellent
thing to be doing: everyone has been complaining about it since its introduction
(for good reason).

I'm not sure about such explicit typing: see my patch (the existing types are
only for convenience: you can trivially supply your own). I agree with the
"one file, one value" idea. I also went for dynamic directories for those who
don't want to continually register/deregister.

I suggest you read my patch 8)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.230 / U:4.632 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site