Re: [RFC] Should /proc/(foo) be /etc/dynamic/(foo) ?

From: Alexander Demenshin (aldem-linux@aldem.net)
Date: Tue May 02 2000 - 14:02:16 EST


On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 02:02:25PM -0400, dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:

> 1) The use of ASCII text files for system/program configuration is a
> Goodness.

  So-so - it is good for humans but not so good for computers (why should
  some process parse configuration every time? it could be better to
  pre-parse it - otherwise we spent a lot of CPU cycles to do parsing).
  BTW, current concept of /proc (text data in human readable form) is extremely
  slow comparing to "raw" access (through ioctl() for example).
  (Hey, CPU power is not limitless :))

> 2) Grouping these ASCII configuration files in a common place (instead of
> scattering them throughout the system) is also a goodness

  Sure - good idea.

> 3) There exists a mountpoint that (mostly) contains these files in a
> (mostly) common space - /etc

  In this case - why /etc? Why not /config, /system or /setup? If you plan to change
  defaults anyway - why not to choose the proper name? ;)

> 4) This implies that /etc, as well as being a filesystem, is also a
> hierarchical registry/namespace of sorts. Poorly organized, with way too
> much stuff at the root level of the hierarchy, but still a registry.

  You forgot about /usr(/local)?/lib - also a lot of config files and so on.
  And, BTW, it looks more organized rather than current /etc :)

> 2) Move the special files that change system operation/configuration out of
> /proc (which really should be just for processes) into an /etc root level
> mountpoint, perhaps as /etc/dynamic or some such.

  Well... I see that this is for Linux 3.* :)) Nice idea, though... At current
  stage it can be implemented using symlinks, BTW. Like:
  
  /config/kernel -> /proc/sys
  
> 3) On a related pet peeve, standardize on a ~/etc directory to store
> user-specific configuration files/directories, instead of a billion
> freakin' dotfiles in the user root directory

  This point is related nearly exclusively to user space, so it is better to discuss
  it with application developers (ha-ha, lets try to do it) :)) You just cannot force
  authors to use it with help of kernel :)

> Comments?

  Above ;) IMHO, of course. Just comments. My own vision(s). Nothing more :)
  
/Al

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 07 2000 - 21:00:10 EST