From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep  9 00:35:35 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2008616A4BF
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 00:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.broadpark.no (mail.broadpark.no [217.13.4.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292F743FDD
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 00:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from smtp.des.no (37.80-203-228.nextgentel.com [80.203.228.37])
	by mail.broadpark.no (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 26623789B4; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 09:35:33 +0200 (MEST)
Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666)
	id DEEA497B28; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 09:35:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from dwp.des.no (dwp.des.no [10.0.0.4])
	by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP
	id BF3649776E; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 09:35:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602)
	id 76B03B822; Tue,  9 Sep 2003 09:35:28 +0200 (CEST)
To: Steven Hartland <killing@barrysworld.com>
References: <00a301c375f4$66080ee0$b3db87d4@vader>
From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 09:35:28 +0200
In-Reply-To: <00a301c375f4$66080ee0$b3db87d4@vader> (Steven Hartland's
 message of "Mon, 8 Sep 2003 11:31:43 +0100")
Message-ID: <xzpoexu76tb.fsf@dwp.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=8.0
	tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,
	      REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA
	version=2.55
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp)
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: linprocfs issues
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 07:35:35 -0000

"Steven Hartland" <killing@barrysworld.com> writes:
> Also it seems that linprocfs relies on procfs being mounted
> however I cant find any docs that mention this and see no
> reason why it should be the case. The problem I see
> is that I get errors from linux apps about /proc/<pid>/file
> not existing. When trussing them they are never trying to
> open "file" I suspect it is happening when the access either
> cmdline or exe most likely exe.

linprocfs uses parts of the procfs code; for instance, linprocfs's
<pid>/exe and procfs's <pid>/file are backed by the same code.  In the
case of <pid>/cmdline, which exists with the same name in both FreeBSD
and Linux, linprocfs relies on procfs's cmdline to "show through"
rather than duplicate it.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no