emo/busybox
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Some emails I exchanged with Alan Cox and Linus re my /dev/ps

Browse Source 
kernel patch.  To summarize, it won't be going into the kernel.
 -Erik
This commit is contained in:
Erik Andersen 2000-04-19 04:34:06 +00:00
parent 262dd039eb
commit 2e397341d9
1 changed files with 93 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

93
examples/kernel-patches/WillThisGoIntoTheKernel Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
From alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Thu Apr 13 08:07:22 2000
Return-Path: <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Delivered-To: andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com
Received: from localhost (dillweed.dsl.xmission.com [10.0.0.1])
by dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D57A11A4F5
for <andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:07:22 -0600 (MDT)
Envelope-to: andersen@xmission.com
Received: from mail.xmission.com
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.3.3)
for andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (single-drop); Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:07:22 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [194.168.151.1] (helo=the-village.bc.nu)
by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #3)
id 12fhQk-0002OZ-00
for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 05:05:03 -0600
Received: from alan by the-village.bc.nu with local (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 12fhQ9-0002nD-00
for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:04:25 +0100
Subject: Re: kernel ps drivers [Was: vm locking question]
To: andersen@xmission.com
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:04:23 +0100 (BST)
In-Reply-To: <20000412224130.A2748@xmission.com> from "Erik Andersen" at Apr 12, 2000 10:41:30 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E12fhQ9-0002nD-00@the-village.bc.nu>
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Status: RO
X-Status: A
Content-Length: 242
Lines: 6
> On the subject of ps, would you be willing to accept my /dev/ps
> patch into the kernel? If no, any suggestions on what should
> be done differently (if anything) to make it worthy of inclusion?
For 2.2.x no, for 2.3.x ask Linus not me
From torvalds@transmeta.com Thu Apr 13 09:18:16 2000
Return-Path: <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Delivered-To: andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com
Received: from localhost (dillweed.dsl.xmission.com [10.0.0.1])
by dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3776411A3DF
for <andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com>; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:18:16 -0600 (MDT)
Envelope-to: andersen@xmission.com
Received: from mail.xmission.com
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.3.3)
for andersen@dillweed.dsl.xmission.com (single-drop); Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:18:16 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [209.10.217.66] (helo=neon-gw.transmeta.com)
by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.03 #3)
id 12flK2-0004dd-00
for andersen@xmission.com; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 09:14:22 -0600
Received: (from root@localhost)
by neon-gw.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA18635;
Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:10:51 -0700
Received: from mailhost.transmeta.com(10.1.1.15) by neon-gw.transmeta.com via smap (V2.1)
id xma018629; Thu, 13 Apr 00 08:10:25 -0700
Received: from penguin.transmeta.com (root@penguin.transmeta.com [10.1.2.202])
by deepthought.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA12264;
Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (torvalds@localhost) by penguin.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA02051; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: penguin.transmeta.com: torvalds owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
To: Erik Andersen <andersen@xmission.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: kernel ps drivers [Was: vm locking question]
In-Reply-To: <20000413083127.A976@xmission.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004130812170.2000-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: RO
Content-Length: 659
Lines: 16
On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Erik Andersen wrote:
>
> For 2.3.x would you be willing to accept my /dev/ps driver into the kernel?
> (Assuming I remove the /dev/modules driver (since it was pointed out that there
> is a perfectly good syscall providing that interface). If no, is there anything
> that could be done differently (if anything) to make it worthy of inclusion?
I do dislike /dev/ps mightily. If the problem is that /proc is too large,
then the right solution is to just clean up /proc. Which is getting done.
And yes, /proc will be larger than /dev/ps, but I still find that
preferable to having two incompatible ways to do the same thing.
Linus