Re: How about a /proc/patches ?

Kevin Lentin (kevinl@cs.monash.edu.au)
Thu, 26 Feb 1998 16:12:12 +1100

On Wed, Feb 25, 1998 at 02:30:20PM -0500, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>
> Second: I took a look at it, and decided the /proc/patches entry wasn't
> necessary, as the same info was available from dmesg anyway. However, the
> /proc/config file could be very useful, and it doesn't look like it adds
> much code to the kernel. So my recommendation would be to keep

Well, then get rid of /proc/scsi/scsi as well since it's in dmesg.

> /proc/patches and /proc/config and ditch print_patches() at startup.
> [can you format /proc/config as closely as possible to .config, so that
> modules/programs that are used to scanning /usr/src/linux/.config for info
> can redirect their search easily to /proc/config instead? Alternatively
> it could look like include/linux/autoconf.h instead.]

I think .config would be a could match to use.

-- 
[======================================================================]
[     Kevin Lentin               Email: K.Lentin@cs.monash.edu.au      ]
[   finger kevinl@fangorn.cs.monash.edu.au for PGP public key block.   ]
[  KeyId: 06808EED    FingerPrint: 6024308DE1F84314  811B511DBA6FD596  ]
[======================================================================]


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu