Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> On 4 Apr 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> > We really do need a set of common routines for input data like this.
> > Right now the various /proc devices which accept input data are all
> > over the place, and duplicate effort. The sysctl code has the right
> > idea -- special handlers to accept certain input data, and
> > standardized formats for both input and output -- except that the rest
> > of the sysctl code is a mess as far as I can tell.
> >
> > sysctl is a lot like SNMP MIBs. It might be a good idea to formalize
> > this relationship.
>
> Not likely. Names should be strings, damnit. Notice that *BSD folks seem
> to be moving to sysctlbyname(), which takes a _name_, not an array of
> magic constants as a sysctl ID. And right they are - it's UNIX, not
> OS/360, after all.
>
Well, part of the advantage for doing that is that it would make it
trivial to run Linux remotely via SNMP. This is a *huge* advantage.
-hpa
-
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 : Fri Apr 07 2000 - 21:00:16 EST