Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:24:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:24:35 -0500 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.156]:1028 "HELO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:24:24 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 19:24:13 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Cc: Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: /proc standards (was dot-proc interface [was: /proc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-supervisor: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 6 Nov 2001, Erik Hensema wrote: > >1) IT SHOULD NOT BE PRETTY. No tabs to line up columns. No "progress > >bars." No labels except as "proc comments" (see later). No in-line labelling. > > It should not be pretty TO HUMANS. Slight difference. It should > be pretty to shellscripts and other applications though. I really fail to see your point, it's trivial to make files which are easy to read by humans and also very easy to parse by shellscripts. PROCESSOR=0 VENDOR_ID=GenuineIntel CPU_FAMILY=6 MODEL=6 MODEL_NAME="Celeron (Mendocino)" ..... As you can see, this is easily readable by humans, while "parsing" by a shell script would be as follows: . /proc/cpuinfo After which you could just "echo $PROCESSOR" or something like that ... Yes, this is probably a bad example, but it does show that machine-readable and human-readable aren't mutually exclusive. regards, Rik -- DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/ http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/