Re: PROPOSAL: /proc standards (was dot-proc interface [was: /proc stuff])

Ben Greear
2001-11-06T19:38:59Z

Stephen Satchell wrote:

> The /proc API was developed to solve a specific problem. Now, people
> have proposed and The Powers That Be have accepted extensions to the
> /proc interface as a superior way to tune the kernel, particularly from
> shell scripts, and to monitor the kernel, again from shell scripts.
> It's a good thing, actually, in that it preserves the best of the Unix
> mentality: don't re-invent, reuse.

I definately like this approach....

> The RIGHT tool to fix the problem is the pen, not the coding pad. I
> hereby pick up that pen and put forth version 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1 of the
> Rules of /Proc:
>
> 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.

Tabs and/or multiple spaces should not be any harder to parse than
a single space, so I don't necessarily see the need to restrict them.

> 3) All integral decimal values shall be assumed by both programs and
> humans to consist of any number of bits. [C'mon, people, dealing with
> 64-bit or 128-bit numbers is NOT HARD. If you don't know how, LEARN.
> bc(1) can provide hints on how to do this -- use the Source, Luke.]
> Numbers shall contain decimal digits [0-9] only. Zero-padding is allowed.

Sometimes HEX is the best way to display things. I think we should be
able to use 0xAABBCCDD type formatting. The key here is to always prefix
with 0x so we can parse it correctly.

--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear