From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 2 10:58:06 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09642 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:58:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from kithrup.com (kithrup.com [205.179.156.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA09469 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:57:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sef@kithrup.com) Received: (from sef@localhost) by kithrup.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29632; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:57:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sef) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:57:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Sean Eric Fagan Message-Id: <199806021757.KAA29632@kithrup.com> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernfs/procfs questions... Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In article <199806012341.QAA02024.kithrup.freebsd.hackers@dingo.cdrom.com> you write: >Does anyone have any strong opinions? Justifications? The linux procfs is an abomination. It should have been broken into /kern and /proc. I like kernfs; I used to have it installed, but sysctl did end up changing it. Frankly, I prefer kernfs to sysctl, unlike John -- sysctl is an interface that just cries out for being in the filesystem. (If you don't believe that, then you also do not get to complain about the SysV IPC mechanisms having a similar-but-seperate namespace.) I don't know what to do about the linux procfs compatibility problems; that may, in fact, be an ideal use for portalfs, although I haven't looked into it closely enough. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message