[TUHS] UNIX of choice these days?

Bakul Shah bakul at bitblocks.com
Mon Sep 25 07:38:59 AEST 2017


> On Sep 24, 2017, at 1:36 PM, Kurt H Maier <khm at sciops.net> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 07:06:17AM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
>> +1 on what Ron said.  I don't get the rationale for going back to ptrace.
>> Anyone know what it is?  Is there a perf issue?
> 
> The usual rationale presented is that someone can exhaust the fd table
> and then you can't get anything done.  Instead of fixing that problem,
> the popular approach is to add more syscalls, like with getrandom(2).

$ svn log sys/fs/procfs/procfs.c | head
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r314690 | badger | 2017-03-04 19:05:24 -0800 (Sat, 04 Mar 2017) | 15 lines
remove procfs ctl interface

This interface has no in-tree consumers and has been more or less
non-functional for several releases.

Remove manpage note that the procfs special file 'mem' is grouped to
kmem. This hasn't been true since r81107.

Remove procfs' README file. It is an out of date duplication of the manpage
(quoth the README: "since the bsd kernel is single-processor...").

Reviewed by:    vangyzen, bcr (manpage)
Approved by:    des (procfs maintainer), vangyzen (mentor)
Differential Revision:  https://reviews.freebsd.org/D9802

------------------------------------------------------------------------
r232278 | mm | 2012-02-28 16:30:18 -0800 (Tue, 28 Feb 2012) | 5 lines



There are just a few potential users of /proc and they were already
using other facilities. plus /proc is an optional facility. All this
conspired to make /proc less useful in FreeBSD. Unused code is in
danger of being garbage collected in FreeBSD :-)



More information about the TUHS mailing list