Messages in this thread | | | From | (david parsons) | Subject | Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports... | Date | 31 Aug 1999 17:17:23 -0700 |
| |
In article <linux.kernel.d3r9kjzjjl.fsf@lxp03.cern.ch>, Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch> wrote: >>>>>> "Ronald" == Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> writes: > >Ronald> I can't think of any good argument for keeping "processor" for >Ronald> the i386 and "cpu" for the sparc64. Someone should probably >Ronald> fix all the different ports so that the verbiage is >Ronald> consistent... > >Since none of the info in /proc/cpuinfo should be of interest to any >tools
Why not? I'd say that the contents of /proc/cpuinfo would be very interesting to tools, because it's what the operating system thinks it's running on.
As much as I hate to say it, this is probably a case where backward compatability could be overlooked; enough of the tools that do use /proc are already very fragile and blow up every time the kernel goes up a major version to make it seem a good idea to blow up the published interface and replace it with a consistant interface across platforms.
____ david parsons \bi/ thinking of procinfo and ps -u today :-( \/
- 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/
| |