Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:10:57 -0600 (CST) From: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kelly Dean <kellydeanch@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Why is procfs deprecated in favor of procstat? Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1102221304163.7969@freddy.simplesystems.org> In-Reply-To: <201102220931.17733.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201102211707.p1LH7c8n075660@lurza.secnetix.de> <476667.58379.qm@web121516.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20110222095211.GA96223@icarus.home.lan> <201102220931.17733.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, John Baldwin wrote: > > Actually, the replacement for procfs is not sysctl, but ptrace(2), and there I have been following this discussion with my jaw agape. It seems that the many men standing around this elephant are all perceiving completely different things based on their own interests and experiences. My own software is using procfs to efficiently determine the path to the currently running executable. I am sure that other software does the same since Linux procfs (and probably OS X) supports the same mechanism. It is difficult to imagine how this would be done via ptrace(2). Bob -- Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.2.01.1102221304163.7969>