On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:55 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
i think the answer to your question is that it's a lot more useful
to know that it's #s/boot rather than /net/il/0/data.
Really? Why? With /net/il/0/data you have an option of digging
deeper and
finding out the other end's address, etc. Or to flip the question
-- what
information does #s/boot provide?
the reason why #s/boot is useful is twofold. the name means
something.
#s/boot is a bit special but I get your general point. So, let me
rephrase:
the usefulness of #s/foo is determined by the naming convention.
this is a connection to the fs used to boot the machine. second, /
net/il/0/data
can't be mounted.
Sure it can:
% srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com!9fs test
% ls /net/tcp
/net/tcp/0
/net/tcp/1
/net/tcp/2
/net/tcp/clone
% mount -n /net/tcp/2/data /n/test
%
if you want the name of something to mount, ns gives
you want you want.
Not really, what gets mounted is a Chan to /net/tcp/*/data
as far as I cat tell.
why are you complaining that ns gives you the most useful
information?
I'm not complaining about /proc/*/ns I'm complaining about ns(1)
which already does some translations of raw data from /proc/*/ns
but not this particular one.
Thanks,
Roman.
