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
/proc filesystem...

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.

~Steve

-- 
Steven R. Allen - allen@cssg4.cslab.ds.boeing.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