This message generated a parse failure. Raw output follows here. Please use 'back' to navigate. From devnull@lkml.org Fri Apr 19 10:39:57 2024 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264582AbTLLNxq (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:53:46 -0500 Received: from yue.hongo.wide.ad.jp ([203.178.139.94]:12810 "EHLO yue.hongo.wide.ad.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264578AbTLLNxm (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:53:42 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by yue.hongo.wide.ad.jp (8.12.3+3.5Wbeta/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id hBCDknwH007184; Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:46:50 +0900 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:46:49 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20031212.224649.20046672.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> To: jmorris@redhat.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: sysctl vs /proc/sys From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCNUhGIzFRTEAbKEI=?= In-Reply-To: References: <20031212.215837.31545329.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Organization: USAGI Project X-URL: http://www.yoshifuji.org/%7Ehideaki/ X-fingerprint: 90 22 65 EB 1E CF 3A D1 0B DF 80 D8 48 07 F8 94 E0 62 0E EA X-PGP-Key-URL: http://www.yoshifuji.org/%7Ehideaki/hideaki@yoshifuji.org.asc X-Face: "5$Al-.M>NJ%a'@hhZdQm:."qn~PA^gq4o*>iCFToq*bAi#4FRtx}enhuQKz7fNqQz\BYU] $~O_5m-9'}MIs`XGwIEscw;e5b>n"B_?j/AkL~i/MEaZBLP X-Mailer: Mew version 2.2 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.1 (AOI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article (at Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:20:41 -0500 (EST)), James Morris says: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / [iso-2022-jp] 吉藤英明 wrote: > > > Or, I'd rather propose introducing sysctlbyname(2). > > See the thread at > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=105788786819578&w=2 Thanks, James. I think I missed the thread. Well, some applications which can run on *BSD* and Linux uses sysctl. Because using procfs changes the semantics, I'd love to have sysctlbyname(). Can we get the exact previous value from /proc/sys atomicly? If so, I'm ok not to have sysctlbyname(2) because we can have sysctlbyname(3). If no, please let's have sysctlbyname(2); there ARE something we cannot do only without sysctl variants. Note: sysctlbyname(3) and sysctlnametomib(3) is in FreeBSD. --yoshfuji - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/