> 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
optional."

"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

			    mouse@collatz.mcrcim.mcgill.edu