Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage.

Mike A. Harris (mharris@ican.net)
Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:50:26 -0500 (EST)


On Sat, 24 Oct 1998, Mark H. Wood wrote:

>[good point about punctuation snipped]
>> Would it be reasonable to have some kind of format version number in each
>> entry in /proc? Perhaps the first line could be an integer that gets
>> bumped if the format of that entry is ever changed in a way that would
>> not be compatible with non-braindead existing programs? Might as well allow
>> for the possibility that the current reorganization of /proc (if it goes
>> anywhere...) might not be the last and make it easier on programs that
>> want to part things there.
>
>Oh, no! Here it comes again. Perhaps much more important than
>endianness or punctuation is once and for all settling the question of
>whether /proc is for humans or for programs. Because these two types of
>entities have different, often diametrically-opposed, formatting
>requirements.
>
>(My take on this question is that programs should not be looking in /proc
>at all; everything shown there should be available in binary form via
>syscall, and if you want to use the data in scripts there should be
>userspace programs that use the syscalls and provide script-appropriate
>formatting. This way, programs have no column-order or spelling issues to
>deal with (on the input side, anyway), and other format changes should be
>rare because in most cases the format will be tied to the CPU
>architecture. Meanwhile humans get to read stuff that isn't cluttered
>with format version numbers or obfuscated to make mechanical parsing easier.)

Why do programs parse /proc at all then?

procps for example?

Is all the info in /proc truly available with syscalls?
Seriously, I'm asking out of pure curiousity as I'm not an expert
in this area whatsoever. I'd like to get at the information in
/proc/cpuinfo, and some other files in /proc, but if there is a
direct way that doesn't use /proc, I'd sure like to know what it
is and how to do it. Granted of course that I haven't bothered
to try and look.... Can anyone point me to how to access the
info such as processor stepping, cpu information, etc... without
reading proc?

Thanks in advance.

--
Mike A. Harris  -  Computer Consultant  -  Linux advocate

Linux software galore: http://freshmeat.net

- 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/