Re: What /proc should contain [was: /proc/driver/microcode]

From: Dag Brattli (
Date: Thu Feb 24 2000 - 05:00:10 EST

"Albert D. Cahalan" <> writes:

> Peter T. Breuer writes:
> > "A month of sundays ago Ricky Beam wrote:"
> >> There shouldn't be one damned bit of english text in there anywhere.
> >
> > I disagree. procfs is the most important and useful reporting system
> > the kernel has.
> I hope you actually wrote serious proc-using code. If not, you should
> not argue. I wrote the new ps, and I think /proc is a crawling horror.

I guess I might upset some people, but why not present most files in /proc
in XML format. Then you just add tags to all the information describing the
both structure and what the info really is. The good thing with this is
that you can both add new or remove information without breaking old
applications. You don't need to worry about different versions of the
kernel having different output, and you could even use your web-browser
(when they have XML-support, Opera already has) to view the /proc file
system. Your ps program and many others could be replaced by a style-sheet 8)

-- Dag

   / Dag Brattli                   | The Linux-IrDA Project               /
  // University of Tromsoe, Norway | Infrared communication for Linux    //
 ///    |   ///

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 29 2000 - 21:00:09 EST