Re: debugfs in the namespace

[Pete Zaitcev]

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:18:43 -0800, Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hm, what about /.debug ?  That's a compromise that I can live with (even
> less key strokes to get to...)

No way, Jan is out of his mind, adding obfuscations like that. Anything
but that. I didn't even bother to reply, because it never occurred to me
that you'd fall for something so retarded.

Otherwise, /dbg sounds good.

Mike's objections sound philosophically congenial to me. What I'm trying
to have here is to support an equivalent of tcpdump, which some may consider
a core function rather than a debugging function. Of course, I could easily
say "this is for debugging only" and thus deflect Mike, but this is not
about winning, and actually I have no investment in any approach. For me the
/sys is obviously out because of the "one file one value" doctrine. The /proc
sounds attractive, but programming procfs is such a bother. If we had a debugfs
style API to procfs, that would be the winner from the standpoint of this
application. Failing that, I guess, it's /dbg.

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