Subject: Re: kernel & libkvm [was IIci success]
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Steve Allen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/10/1996 09:33:43
On Jan 10, 3:33am, der Mouse wrote:
>This is the Nth time I've heard something like "This would be neat, but
>since kernfs (or procfs) is optional, ...".
>Perhaps it's time to admit that they offer significant useful
>functionality and make them an if-you-don't-use-it-things-will-break
>part of the system?
SGI has done that, and it seems that every other week there's a complaint
on sgi.admin about something broken. The answer usually is that someone's
done a 'umount -a' and the solution is to run 'mntproc' to remount the
I have nothing against it myself, but if we do go that route, prominent
note needs to be made so the clue-impaired have a fighting chance.
Steven R. Allen - email@example.com
"Dang, I know I left it here somewhere!" "What?" "My mind. I've lost my mind!"
<a href="http://www.eskimo.com/~wormey/">Steve's home page.</a>
This message conveys the opinion only of the author, and not of the Boeing Co.
Since we're all here, we must not be all there.
-- Bob "Mountain" Beck