Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports...

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
31 Aug 1999 17:17:23 -0700


In article <linux.kernel.d3r9kjzjjl.fsf@lxp03.cern.ch>,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch> wrote:
>>>>>> "Ronald" == Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> writes:
>
>Ronald> I can't think of any good argument for keeping "processor" for
>Ronald> the i386 and "cpu" for the sparc64. Someone should probably
>Ronald> fix all the different ports so that the verbiage is
>Ronald> consistent...
>
>Since none of the info in /proc/cpuinfo should be of interest to any
>tools

Why not? I'd say that the contents of /proc/cpuinfo would be very
interesting to tools, because it's what the operating system thinks
it's running on.

As much as I hate to say it, this is probably a case where backward
compatability could be overlooked; enough of the tools that do use
/proc are already very fragile and blow up every time the kernel
goes up a major version to make it seem a good idea to blow up the
published interface and replace it with a consistant interface
across platforms.

____
david parsons \bi/ thinking of procinfo and ps -u today :-(
\/

-
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/