From owner-cvs-all Sun Mar 26 22:22:41 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from piranha.amis.net (piranha.amis.net [212.18.32.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFC737BBAD; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 22:22:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from blaz@amis.net) Received: from gold.amis.net (gold.amis.net [212.18.32.254]) by piranha.amis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFAB85D14; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 08:22:26 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 08:22:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Blaz Zupan To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/miscfs/linprocfs linprocfs_misc.c In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I'll restate it, hopefully more clearly. How's this: > > And then when some Linux app wants to use parts of procfs that are implemented > in both Linux native procfs and FreeBSD native procfs, but which are not in > FreeBSD native linprocfs? ... then "someone" implements the missing feature in FreeBSD native linprocfs :) But still, isn't having a linprocfs that half of the Linux apps can use better than having no linprocfs and not being able to run the apps at all? I'm not sure how easy it would be (probably not very, because it depends on FreeBSD sources?) to put it in ports together with the Linux emulation libraries. After all, its of no use if you don't have the Linux emulation running. Blaz Zupan, blaz@amis.net, http://home.amis.net/blaz/ Medinet d.o.o., Linhartova 21, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message