From owner-freebsd-security  Mon Aug 11 21:22:33 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA26823
          for security-outgoing; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA26818
          for <security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA23465;
	Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199708120424.VAA23465@implode.root.com>
To: "Jay D. Nelson" <jdn@qiv.com>
cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Yet another proc question 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:54:41 CDT."
             <Pine.BSF.3.96.970811215027.1842A-100000@acp.qiv.com> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 21:24:47 -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Sean, you had mentioned that ps uses /proc. I simply unmounted /proc
>and ps, w, etc. seem to work just fine -- at least with the flags I
>use all the time.
>
>What practical benefit is there to the proc filesystem on a production
>machine?

   procfs is used to get the command arguments.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project