Re: Why no sysctl (Was: Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage ...)

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Sat, 4 Sep 1999 13:26:02 +0100 (BST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: laslo@wodip.opole.pl: "2.3.16, UMSDOS - still no go"
Previous message: sushil@iitk.ac.in: "SMP linux help"
In reply to: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports..."

> Coming from a Free/OpenBSD background, I have always really liked
> the sysctl MIB. The sysctl command line too allows values to be manipulated
> and read easily (much easier than parsing the /proc entries).
>
> Why does Linux deprecate that use? Why has is opted for a /proc
> interface?

The /proc/sys interface is a direct mapping into sysctl space

-
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/

Next message: laslo@wodip.opole.pl: "2.3.16, UMSDOS - still no go"
Previous message: sushil@iitk.ac.in: "SMP linux help"
In reply to: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports..."