Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:04:02 +0200 From: Ruben de Groot <mail23@bzerk.org> To: Josh Brooks <user@mail.econolodgetulsa.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: No /proc or procfs by default in 5.1-RELEASE ... why ? Message-ID: <20030716100402.GA15743@ei.bzerk.org> In-Reply-To: <20030715233938.P36933-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com> References: <20030715233938.P36933-100000@mail.econolodgetulsa.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:42:49PM -0700, Josh Brooks typed: > > Hello, > > As I am sure many have noticed, a default installation of 5.1-RELEASE will > leave you with no procfs mounted at /proc, and no entry in /etc/fstab for > a procfs. > > Is this by design ? Yes > Is it better to not run /proc on 5.x ? Securitywise, absolutely > What are the consequences of running without a procfs on 5.x ? I believe there's still some work going on to make a program like truss(8) not use the /proc interface, but otherwise all normal utilities are clean. > > OR > > > Was this just a bug/oversight in the 5.1-RELEASE, and in reality we should > definitely be running a procfs and have an entry in /etc/fstab, etc. ? > > > This is with the GENERIC kernel, but other kernels I build with PROCFS > also do not result in a procfs existing either - I always have to manually > mount it. > > > Any commnts of any kind related to the design decision that may have been > behind this - or any explanation of a kind as to why the 5.1-RELEASE has > no procfs mounted or in fstab by default is much apprecaited! This has been discussed on the mailing lists extensively. Search the archieves. -Ruben > thanks! > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030716100402.GA15743>