Re: /proc and /kern

Mirian Crzig Lennox (
04 Dec 1998 13:38:03 -0500

o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s (david parsons) writes:

> >Anyway, the question I have is this: I would like to work on splitting
> >/proc into /proc and /kern, such that /proc is only for process
> >information and /kern is for kernel structures.
> Unless you also write a union filesystem so that those of us who
> are anal about backwards compatability won't be royally bitten in
> the ass, it's a really really really dumb idea.

I thought making the change configurable would take care of that.
What do you think about Alain Williams' symlink suggestion?

> (On the other
> hand, I'd probably _pay_ you if you also wrote a union filesystem,
> because that's an all purpose tool that could be used all over the
> place.)

Linux doesn't have one? Hmm....

> >Another thought I had is to make the pseudo files in /proc and /kern
> >display real size information instead of 0, as they do under BSD,
> That would be really nice, if you could have come guarantee that
> the size wouldn't change between stat time and access time.

Technically, you never have this guarantee ever in unix. But I agree
with pretty much everyone that it's probably impractical because it
would involve generating the data for all the files in a file listing.

I still think it would be nice if the fs could some how indicate that
file's size was undefined, as opposed to simply zero, but I'm unsure
of how best to do that.

Mirian Crzig Lennox                                Systems Anarchist
          "There's a New World Order coming every minute.
                      Make mine extra cheese."

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to Please read the FAQ at