Subject: Re: kernel & libkvm [was IIci success]
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Collatz.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
List: current-users
Date: 01/11/1996 10:07:04
> As much as I'd like to make procfs required, I can't justify
> endorsing that proposal until we have utilities that can make use of
> it.

Hm.  We now have the following situation.

"I'd like to use procfs for this utility, but mustn't because it's only

"I'd like to make procfs non-optional, but nothing uses it."

Someone's gonna have to bite one bullet or the other, or we'll be
forever stuck where we are. :-)

					der Mouse