Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:21:48 -0700 From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: dyson@freebsd.org, jehamby@lightside.com, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, hackers@freebsd.org, karl@mcs.net Subject: Re: PS broke again -- what has to be rebuilt to stop this? Message-ID: <199610011621.JAA01098@lestat.nas.nasa.gov>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 1 Oct 1996 18:54:46 +1000 Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> wrote: > I think the main advantage of kernfs is that it is more efficient in > shell scripts. Running sysctl(8) to fetch a value from the kernel > and format it nicely takes a while. Actually, if I remember right, the whole point of kernfs was really just an example of something cool you could do with the 4.4BSD vfs code. (Keeping in mind I'm talking about NetBSD here) I don't usually rely on it for _anything_ (even in shell scripts, though a port or two use it for access to the msgbuf .. saves having to include dmesg in the miniroot :-) because I'm not willing to tell a user "you have to have this in your kernel, or else you will lose." [ going back to what the original topic seems to have been... ] In my mind, using /proc for ps(1) is just silly... if you're reading structures, you still have the same problem as you have now, if you're reading and parsing strings (more "portable"), it gets slow. Besides, you have to keep the kvm code in ps(1) anyhow, else you lose the ability to analyze crashdumps with it. The marginal gain doesn't seem worth the clutter. Jason R. Thorpe thorpej@nas.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center Home: 408.866.1912 NAS: M/S 258-6 Work: 415.604.0935 Moffett Field, CA 94035 Pager: 415.428.6939
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610011621.JAA01098>