[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: PROPOSAL: /proc standards (was dot-proc interface [was: /proc
On 6 Nov 2001, Erik Hensema wrote:

> >1) IT SHOULD NOT BE PRETTY. No tabs to line up columns. No "progress
> >bars." No labels except as "proc comments" (see later). No in-line labelling.
> It should not be pretty TO HUMANS. Slight difference. It should
> be pretty to shellscripts and other applications though.

I really fail to see your point, it's trivial to make
files which are easy to read by humans and also very
easy to parse by shellscripts.

MODEL_NAME="Celeron (Mendocino)"

As you can see, this is easily readable by humans,
while "parsing" by a shell script would be as follows:

. /proc/cpuinfo

After which you could just "echo $PROCESSOR" or
something like that ...

Yes, this is probably a bad example, but it does show
that machine-readable and human-readable aren't mutually


DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares?

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:0.172 / U:8.776 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site