Subject: Re: Sysctl vendor fields
To: Quentin Garnier <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/03/2003 23:54:41
>The first one was, instead of only declaring CTL_XXX and XXX_VALUE defines
>and write a function for every single subtree, to declare full structs
>that reference each other in a way that makes it possible for a single
>function to handle a whole subtree, with some quirks for some values that
>need special management.
>The other idea, which I still haven't explored yet is to extend the first
>one by providing a way for the sysctl binary to list the available names
>of a hierarchy. By reserving (or allocating) space for the vendor subtree
>or any other OID, it would be then possible for LKMs or kernel extensions
>to easily register some new OIDs.
>I don't know what ideas or comments other people might have, but if anyone
>thinks it's worth the coding, I'd be more than happy to start coding.
i started something like this once, and even picked it up again very
recently, but i don't have anything much to show for it yet.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."