Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 05:58:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 05:57:55 -0400 Received: from weta.f00f.org ([203.167.249.89]:62102 "EHLO weta.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 05:57:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 22:58:31 +1300 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [CFT][PATCH] large /proc/mounts and friends Message-ID: <20011016225831.A26737@weta.f00f.org> In-Reply-To:

Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22i X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 09:01:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: But you're probably right that it doesn't really matter, and as we really have "pipe" semantics we might as well dis-allow any lseek except to the beginning (I know that there have been apps out there that avoid re-opening /proc files by lseek'ing to zero and re-reading - they may not be common enough to matter, though). I always wondered why for a number of /proc entries that aren't really files why we don't simply expose them as pipes as opposed to zero-length files? Surely that will confuse fewer user-land programs as well and feeling more technically correct? --cw - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/