Ed Carp <erc@pobox.com> writes:
> Terje Kvernes (terjekv@ifi.uio.no) writes:
>
> > Ed Carp <erc@pobox.com> writes:
> >
> > > No, no, NO! Straight ASCII. Forget the latest XML/XSL BS/hype.
> >
> > in the files, yes! but I'd like a tools to present this
> > information (no matter how it is stored) as XML for other use. I
> > really thought I was clear on that. ;)
>
> If the files are easy to read and parse, writing tools to produce
> XML or whatever becomes almost childishly simple.
I'll drink to that.
> But that's not the point I'm trying to make - my point is, the file
> format should be (1) EASY for SHELL SCRIPTS to parse, and (2) EASY
> for HUMANS to parse, too. Why make it harder than it has to be?
totally agreed upon. all I want is a singular (and preferably simple)
way of organizing /proc. imagine a /proc where every tree behaves the
same. :-)
I'm growing very fond of the "one value / file"-notion. and maybe the
/sys (or whatever) to separate process information from system
information.
I _don't_ want parsers to have to handle "cases" in the system, like
sometimes you'll have several values in a file, other times you don't.
if we can keep _one_ view, we should. IMHO of course. ;)
-- Terje- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 15 2000 - 21:00:17 EST