Antti Kantee wrote:
On Tue Feb 24 2009 at 19:47:25 +1100, Daniel Carosone wrote:On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 07:35:54PM +1100, matthew green wrote:/proc should stay related to processes, with the exception of whatever is "needed" for linux compat.I have yet to hear a technical argument for that. The technical and pragmatic argument against it is wasting developer time, wired kernel memory, if-else clauses in scripts, etc. in having two separate file systems which do the same thing.
Clean design? Let's face it: /proc under Linux is ugly, especially when you throw in sysfs. I am wondering what the hell /proc/mounts or /proc/interrupts are doing in there, really.
Like it or not, /proc is not going away. Creating gratuitous differences to other systems due to religious reasons is quite ridiculous.
I personally didn't know that /kern was on the verge of destruction. Until recently, /proc was merely used for linux_compat stuff, and was not expected to be a complete replacement to /kern. So from my PoV, this is more due to historical reasons rather than religious ones.
So.. guess where linux puts it... :-)what an excellent example (/proc/xen vs. /kern/xen) ...
Well then, let's make everyone happy: we could have /dev/xen/*, like Solaris does :)
-- Jean-Yves Migeon jeanyves.migeon%free.fr@localhost