> In my opinion sysctl() is worthless. It uses an array of numbers
> where ioctl() uses a single number. Especially since the names are
> already in the kernel it is much clearer and cleaner to use a
> pathname. I wouldn't mind if sysctl() disappeared entirely.
Please have a look at /proc/sys/ OK?
> Also ioctl() has its problems. First of all, nobody knows what the
> prototype is. Secondly, it is too rigid - the moment one needs a
> larger structure one needs a different ioctl.
>
> A text based interface is much more flexible. If the number of
> cylinders of a disk no longer fits in a short, well doesn't matter,
> then the number of digits may increase but the interface remains
> unchanged. Of course the price is that one has to parse, but
> typically that is not a problem.
What do you want me to see in /proc/sys/?
Pathnames? That is what I like.
I dislike the system call, with its ugly numbers.
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:13 EST