Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage.
david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
25 Oct 1998 23:24:08 -0800
In article <linux.kernel.199810241617.MAA18320@jupiter.cs.uml.edu>,
Albert D. Cahalan <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> wrote:
>
>Mark H. Wood writes:
>
>> Oh, no! Here it comes again. Perhaps much more important than
>> endianness or punctuation is once and for all settling the question
>> of whether /proc is for humans or for programs. Because these two
>> types of entities have different, often diametrically-opposed,
>> formatting requirements.
>>
>> (My take on this question is that programs should not be looking
>> in /proc at all; everything shown there should be available in
>> binary form via syscall,
>
>Oh yes! I really hate to parse /proc files. Parsing is not at all
>reliable, considering unexpected format changes and spelling fixes.
That's not the fault of the /proc filesystem, but of the people
who promiscuously change the format of entries there without
considering the consequences.
I find it to be easier to poke through /proc, warts and all, than
it is to do any of the alternatives.
____
david parsons \bi/ Luddites -R- me.
\/
-
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/