Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:53:57 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Feldman <green@unixhelp.org> To: =?X-UNKNOWN?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@freebsd.dk> Cc: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@nask.pl>, daeron@Wit401305.student.utwente.nl, shawn@cpl.net, osa@etrust.ru, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: StarOffice-5.0... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811112050420.725-100000@janus.syracuse.net> In-Reply-To: <199811112000.VAA00590@freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Søren Schmidt wrote: > It seems Andrzej Bialecki wrote: > > > As far as I know StarOffice 5.0 install-program tries to read the > > > commandline from /proc ... I think i saw some postings about this on > > > comps.os.unix.bsd.* (or something like that) > > > > Yes, I've got the diffs against relatively fresh current. BTW, I asked > > this question on -emulation, but got back a profound silence... Can we/ > > should we incorporate this patch, and hide it under a kernel option, say > > PROCFS_CMDLINE? The life would be soooo easier for people new to our linux > > emulation... > > Hmm, if we should have a Linsux compatible /proc, it really should be > a beast mounted on /compat/linux/proc. If you provide this, I'm sure > it will be received with open arms :) Linux_procfs sounds good, but if a Linux procfs is implemented... erm.... you see, wouldn't this waste resources? unless we'd be emulating the ENTIRE linux proc (which is total crap, and shouldn't exist), it's probably better just to add it to the standard procfs. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Søren Schmidt (sos@freebsd.org) FreeBSD Core Team member > Cheers, Brian Feldman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9811112050420.725-100000>