Subject: Re: kern.showallprocs implementation
To: Martin Husemann <>
From: Bill Studenmund <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 08/30/2005 11:13:14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 06:23:43PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:08:11AM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > I agree with Steve that we should find out why FreeBSD chose this name.
> >=20
> > I do not think we will see "linux", but I expect we will see other valu=
> I agree with both; it's just that "bsd" is such a bad name - unless there=
> a good explanation for it in this context.

Well, what other suggestions do we have? Since I expect we will have other=
models, I think we do want to keep a subtree. "bsd" is short and easy to=20
type. Other options that come to mind are "unix" or "traditional". "unix"=
may have trademark issues in the USA (I'm not 100% sure how that all=20
worked out, but I'd rather we not find out). And "traditional" is kinda=20
long to type. :-)

So what else _would_ we say? "id"? "" does not seem like a=20
place to set id-based policy, it seems like the place to control either a=
processes or a host's ID. :-)

If we can cook up a better name, let's do it! I however haven't been able=
to figure one out.

Take care,


Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)