Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Peter Wemm
Sean Eric Fagan wrote: > >> Here's a thing I've missed a couple of times: I'd like to be > >> able to see the limits for a process in /proc. > > At some point, I want to add an ioctl to get various process information > (well, multiple ioctl's, I think); SysVr4 has a bunch, and that's what I'd >

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Anthony Kimball wrote: > > : Against that there is a general Linuxism/Kitchen-Sink feeling. > > Think of this case as a plan9-ism. I think nothing of it... My opinions wouldn't matter a tiny little bit. :-) Still, after reading the Samba reply to the Microsoft, err, Mindcraft NTvsLinus benchmar

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Anthony Kimball
: : Against that there is a general Linuxism/Kitchen-Sink feeling. : Think of this case as a plan9-ism. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Sean Eric Fagan
>> Here's a thing I've missed a couple of times: I'd like to be >> able to see the limits for a process in /proc. At some point, I want to add an ioctl to get various process information (well, multiple ioctl's, I think); SysVr4 has a bunch, and that's what I'd model it on. >I'd like to be able

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Daniel C. Sobral
Dom Mitchell wrote: > > As for making ps totally proc aware, I'm not totally sure that's the way > to go. I shall have to have a look through the archives though; I've a > feeling that this has been discussed before... DCS, The Archive Man, comes to your help. If you make ps procfs dependent, y

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread adrian
Dom Mitchell writes: >On 23 April 1999, adr...@freebsd.org proclaimed: >> Dom Mitchell writes: >> >What we really need are some tools similiar to solaris' /usr/proc/bin >> >stuff. http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-supersys.html >> >Sadly, the ability to do this lies well outside my meag

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Dom Mitchell
On 23 April 1999, adr...@freebsd.org proclaimed: > Dom Mitchell writes: > >What we really need are some tools similiar to solaris' /usr/proc/bin > >stuff. http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-supersys.html > >Sadly, the ability to do this lies well outside my meagre coding > >knowledge. >

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread adrian
Dom Mitchell writes: >On 23 April 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp proclaimed: >> No, I just want a way to figure out what login.conf have done to >> various processes... > >What we really need are some tools similiar to solaris' /usr/proc/bin >stuff. http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-supersys.h

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Dom Mitchell
On 23 April 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp proclaimed: > No, I just want a way to figure out what login.conf have done to > various processes... What we really need are some tools similiar to solaris' /usr/proc/bin stuff. http://www.sunworld.com/swol-04-1999/swol-04-supersys.html Sadly, the ability to d

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message <19990423123108.14692.qm...@ewok.creative.net.au>, adr...@freebsd.or G writes: >I've finished the patch. I'll test it a little more when I get back >home tonight, and then send the URL to -current for people to poke >around with. > Cool! >phk - I hope you didn't also want the process

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread adrian
Zach Heilig writes: >On Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 05:16:33PM +0800, adr...@freebsd.org wrote: >> I don't know about that one, but the first one sounds easish. >> Since I've been messing around with procfs quite a bit lately, >> I'll spend some time later today poking around and produce a patch >> agains

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread Zach Heilig
On Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 05:16:33PM +0800, adr...@freebsd.org wrote: > I don't know about that one, but the first one sounds easish. > Since I've been messing around with procfs quite a bit lately, > I'll spend some time later today poking around and produce a patch > against -current . I don't kno

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-23 Thread adrian
David Malone writes: >> Here's a thing I've missed a couple of times: I'd like to be >> able to see the limits for a process in /proc. > >I'd like to be able to open processes file discriptors too (so >you can still get files back if all the filsystem references to >it have gone, but a process st

Re: nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-22 Thread David Malone
> Here's a thing I've missed a couple of times: I'd like to be > able to see the limits for a process in /proc. I'd like to be able to open processes file discriptors too (so you can still get files back if all the filsystem references to it have gone, but a process still has it open). I might h

nice little kernel task for somebody

1999-04-22 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
Here's a thing I've missed a couple of times: I'd like to be able to see the limits for a process in /proc. Any takers ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member p...@freebsd.org "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time befo