Re: /proc guidelines and sysctl

From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen (hps@tanstaafl.de)
Date: Sat Jan 08 2000 - 08:26:14 EST

torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) writes:

>I'll accept a patch that turns sysctl into a proc-only thing.

Linus,

how about systems where there is no choice to have a /proc Filesystem?

I can always hear the cries of Ulrich for having some way to get some
constants from the kernel for glibc . The answer is always "use
/proc". But e.g. I use chrooted() webservers for my customer
CGI-Scripts, and I simply don't want to mount /proc in every single
chroot() just to get some constants in the glibc right.

Why not using sysctl (or call it something else) for _READ ONLY_
access to these basic system constants (e.g. HZ) and the /proc
Filesystem to read/write them?

>The current problem is that sysclt tries to be more than proc, and has its
>own name-space etc. Not worth it.

If you make sysctl a "proc-only-thing", I would still need a /proc
filesystem for my chroot-jailed glibc's, wouldn't I?

        Regards
                Henning 

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen --             hps@tanstaafl.de
TANSTAAFL! Consulting - Unix, Internet, Security      

Hutweide 15                   Fon.: 09131 / 50654-0    "There ain't no such
D-91054 Buckenhof             Fax.: 09131 / 50654-20    thing as a free Linux"

-
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/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:00:12 EST