From owner-freebsd-perl@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 7 07:37:25 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E22E016A4CE for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 07:37:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from heechee.tobez.org (heechee.tobez.org [217.157.39.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D64B643D41 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 07:37:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tobez@tobez.org) Received: by heechee.tobez.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id BCB32175AA; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:37:22 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 09:37:22 +0200 From: Anton Berezin To: Andrew Nelson Message-ID: <20040707073722.GA12811@heechee.tobez.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i cc: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems FreeBSD 5.2.1 & Proc::ProcessTable X-BeenThere: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: maintainer of a number of perl-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2004 07:37:26 -0000 On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 05:10:58PM +1000, Andrew Nelson wrote: > I've upgraded from FreeBSD 4.8 to 5.2.1 and have > noticed a number of script don't work... One perl > module i've found so far is > > Proc::ProcessTable. The subroutines just return > no result (even the examples given at CPAN). > > Can anyone help? Do I need to re-install FreeBSD > to a lower version? If so, what version? I looks like a FreeBSD-specific mechanism that Proc::ProcessTable is using is to look things up in the /proc/. So, you can do one of the following: 1. Mount procfs if your kernel has support for it. 2. Wait until someone fixes Proc::ProcessTable to use more "native" way of finding things about processes out on FreeBSD. 3. Do it yourself (see os/freebsd.c in the distribution of Proc::ProcessTable). Downgrading FreeBSD is also an option, though not a very good one, in my opinion. Cheers, \Anton. -- Floating point will almost always have enough precision for the task at hand, and by the time it doesn't, it will. :-) -- Larry Wall