Hi !
Someone could tell me if the proc/diskstat stuff will be kept in 2.6
and above or do we have to refer _only_
to sysfs by now ?
Regards,
Fabian
"Frederick, Fabian" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi !
>
> Someone could tell me if the proc/diskstat stuff will be kept in 2.6
> and above or do we have to refer _only_
> to sysfs by now ?
>
death, taxes and /proc/diskstats. It ain't going away.
On Wednesday 04 June 2003 05:17, Andrew Morton wrote:
> "Frederick, Fabian" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi !
> >
> > Someone could tell me if the proc/diskstat stuff will be kept in 2.6
> > and above or do we have to refer _only_
> > to sysfs by now ?
>
> death, taxes and /proc/diskstats. It ain't going away.
Out of morbid curiosity, what's the status of union mounts? I've had this
sneaking suspicion that /proc would eventually be broken up into two
filesystems: 1) what /proc was originally meant for (a subdirectory for each
pid), 2) all the extra crap that got shoehorned into it back when it was the
only synthetic filesystem (and after everybody got into the habit of putting
synthetic fs stuff into /proc).
Of course making this work with legacy tools would require union mounting both
procfs and crapfs onto /proc. Which gets us back to "how are union mounts
doing"?
Rob
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/