Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 14:04:27 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 195024] [maintainer-update] net-mgmt/seafile: remove requirements of /proc Message-ID: <bug-195024-13-ufriVegT3L@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-195024-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-195024-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195024 --- Comment #3 from Jingfeng Yan <yan_jingfeng@yahoo.com> --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #2) > this definitely limits the port to freebsd. > > What's wrong with /proc other than handbook doesn't recommend it? What's > the reason the handbook doesn't recommend it? The porter handbook put this under this section: """ 12.18. Avoiding Linuxisms Do not use /proc if there are any other ways of getting the information. For example, setprogname(argv[0]) in main() and then getprogname(3) to know the executable name>. Do not rely on behavior that is undocumented by POSIX. ... """ So, I think this is only reason. :) BTW, although this port is not directly used by other BSDs, I got OpenBSD side contacts and suggest not using /proc, too. OpenBSD once supported /proc, and then removed as I heard (from kernel at least, FUSE may be used). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-195024-13-ufriVegT3L>