Subject: Re: ps vs /proc
To: None <current-users@netbsd.org>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
List: current-users
Date: 02/26/2000 01:28:24
>> Does this help?
>> [df, ps, mount...all producing trash]
> Hm. If your kernel/user skew is so large that ordinary utils like df
> and mount are busted, I don't think it is unreasonable for ps to be
> busted.
I do, since this sort of thing is just what the /proc fallback is all
about: dealing with cases where kernel interfaces have changed, by
using a less frequently changing (but less powerful) interface. For
all the good it's doing me, ps might as well not even have a /proc
fallback. It's particularly annoying because it's *gratuitously*
failing to produce output; the information is there and ps is refusing
to report it, not because it's self-inconsistent or inaccessible, but
just because ps can't be sure it's right. If I want handholding, I
know where to find it!
der Mouse
mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B