Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 14:48:21 +0100 (BST) From: Developer <dev@fgate.flevel.co.uk> To: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> Cc: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Just a note that libkvm/ps/etc need to be recompiled Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.93.960801144726.11680B-100000@fgate.flevel.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199608011243.HAA05038@dyson.iquest.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, John S. Dyson wrote: > > > > Either way, you'd need a libkvm that matched the kernel, but it would > > save every day use from all of these recompiles (w and so on, too). > > > That certainly has not been well thought out. I do think that the > system is much less useful without procfs. It is useful even in many embedded > applications. Perhaps ps/libkvm/etc need to be thought out better. > > But remember, -current isn't targeted for everyday use :-). I wonder if it might be an idea to have a kernel call that gets the proc structure size, that way libkvm/ps/w etc wouldn`t have to be re-compiled when the structure changed? Regards, Trefor S.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.93.960801144726.11680B-100000>