From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jun 30 07:21:34 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA28609 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:21:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from yoda.pi.musin.de (yoda.pi.musin.de [194.246.250.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA28600 for ; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:21:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sec@yoda.pi.musin.de) Received: (from sec@localhost) by yoda.pi.musin.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA02232; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:21:15 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sec) Message-ID: <19980630162115.C2179@yoda.pi.musin.de> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:21:15 +0200 From: Stefan Zehl To: Mike Smith Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Staroffice 4.0 sp3 running References: <19980629132002.A13667@yoda.pi.musin.de> <199806291610.JAA00380@dingo.cdrom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.92.6i In-Reply-To: <199806291610.JAA00380@dingo.cdrom.com>; from Mike Smith on Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:10:36AM -0700 I-love-doing-this: really X-URL: http://sec.42.org/ Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Jun 29, 1998 at 09:10:36AM -0700, Mike Smith wrote: > > I just managed to install Staroffice 4.0sp3. > > > > It requires the file /proc//cmdline to run. > > Amazingly enough, it seems that Linux doesn't actually have /proc/curproc, > which would have made this a lot simpler. linux has /proc/self instead of /proc/curproc - but i can't see how this would make it easier for us ? > > I have just added (an dummy-version of) cmdline in my local copy of > > procfs, but I remember that there was some talk, not to 'bloat' procfs > > with such things. > The real issue is that the Linux and FreeBSD procfs' have different > semantics. Yup, so probably an seperate linux-procfs is probably needed. > We need a separate linux-procfs as part of the linux emulator; it > should mount itself on /compat/linux/procfs. If you're interested in > taking this on (please!), I'm sure we can arrange any support that you > might need. I have not much expirience in fs/kernel hacking, but i will try. I think i will start by taking an renamed conpy of procfs and modify it to make it more linux'ish. This could then be seperately loaded as an lkm. Do you think this is the right way to go ? If so, what would be a good name for it ? lprocfs ? Would it be a showstopper if i did this for 2.2-STABLE instead of -CURRENT ? (my only scrapbox is currently running -stable) CU, Sec -- Komme wieder To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message