Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:00:29 +0100 (BST) From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Cc: viro@math.psu.edu, sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us, fare@tunes.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, tech-kern@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Improving the Unix API Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9906281058070.80685-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <E10yXwO-0004oB-00@the-village.bc.nu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Alan Cox wrote: > > As far as sysctl goes, FreeBSD deprecates the use of numbers for OIDs and > > has a string-based mechanism for exploring the sysctl tree. > > So we are actually both going the same way. Linus with /proc/sys and his > official dislike of sysctl (Oh well I think sysctl using number spaces is the > right idea - like snmp is), and BSD going to names As far as I know, only FreeBSD has a string-based sysctl implementation. Something which always confused me about Linux' procfs - what have all these kernel variables got to do with process state? We used to have a kernfs which was intended for this kind of thing but it rotted after people started extending sysctl for the purpose. -- Doug Rabson Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com Nonlinear Systems Ltd. Phone: +44 181 442 9037 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9906281058070.80685-100000>