Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Feb 2000 23:12:27 -0500 | From | Olivier Galibert <> | Subject | Re: What /proc should contain [was: /proc/driver/microcode] |
| |
On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 01:58:53AM +0100, Peter T. Breuer wrote: > > >You don't get the argument. Language design. You can write your code in > > >assembler, or in C, or in Python. /proc is there to provide the > > >interface that allows us to read the data with the minimum or > > > > 'us' is the program reading from /proc, not the human setting at the console. > > ... > > I disagree. If I had to use a tool to read the files in proc, almost > all its value would disappear for me. It would cease to be a convenience.
I guess an obvious solution would be a program-friendly //sysinfo converted to a human-friendly /proc through a userland filesystem.
OG.
- 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/
| |