From owner-freebsd-current Sun Mar 26 5:44:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (whizzo.TransSys.COM [144.202.42.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E684C37B724 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 05:44:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from louie@whizzo.transsys.com) Received: from whizzo.transsys.com (localhost.transsys.com [127.0.0.1]) by whizzo.transsys.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA80797; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 08:44:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from louie@whizzo.transsys.com) Message-Id: <200003261344.IAA80797@whizzo.transsys.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Doug Rabson Cc: Andrzej Bialecki , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Image-URL: http://www.transsys.com/louie/images/louie-mail.jpg From: "Louis A. Mamakos" Subject: Re: Dynamic sysctls - patches for review References: In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 26 Mar 2000 14:42:39 +0100." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 08:44:09 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I think that if the sysctl data was reorganized, so that the per module or instance data was at the leaves of the tree, you could avoid the problem entirely. This is the general approach used on MIB definitions used for SNMP; each variable is an instance (usually the 0th) at the leaf. You don't get the opportunity to clean them all up at once by deleting a whole subtree, but you don't get the hair, either. louie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message