[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 Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>And then converted back to ASCII for printout on the terminal ;-).

Well, they don't always get printf()'d...

>The second problem is that /proc is one of the few design "inventions" in
>linux, which didn't get copied over from some other UNIX box and Linus
>doesn't wan't recognize that this was A BAD DESIGN CHOICE.

/proc is a wonderful thing for what it was originally intended: access to
the process table without looking at the tables in the kernel memory space
(remember SunOS? what happened if /vmunix wasn't the running kernel?)
Unfortunately, /proc has become the gheto of the Linux kernel. It is now
the general dumping grounds for user/kernel interfacing. As a developer tool
it's very handy; it's also very dangerous. Developers then resort to
/proc as a perminant interface between kernel drivers and userland. (In
the *BSD world, this is a kernfs, not a procfs.)

For an example of /proc done right, find a Solaris box. What do you find
in /proc? Gee, process information. Only process information. In. Binary.


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:0.345 / U:0.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site