On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:15:59AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Does 'procstat -fa' give better results for you?
> It seems to be one of those little hidden secrets that FreeBSD comes > with a bunch of native applications that provide pretty much equivalent > functionality to lsof(1). See: fstat(1), procstat(1), sockstat(1). > Which is odd, given that since these sort of applications have to read > and interpret kernel memory -- an action for which there isn't a nice > well defined ABI -- the application has to be kept rigorously in synch > with the kernel it is used against. Something that is intrinsically > easier to do when kernel and application are compiled at the same time > and from the same source tree. procstat (in all versions that have it) and fstat (in FreeBSD 9.0 and newer) use a well-defined sysctl-based API to access the information. This API was extended in FreeBSD 9.0 and a library libprocstat provides a convenient interface. Reading from kernel memory not only couples the application tightly to the kernel implementation, but also can also be considered a security issue because there is a lot of sensitive information in kernel memory; it cannot be permitted in a jail. -- Jilles Tjoelker _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
