> I have the process running, I know it has been supplied with many
> command line arguments.
> Yet, both 'cat /proc//cmdline' and 'procstat -c ' only show
> it's bare name, no arguments.
>
> How can I see the full command line?
>
did you try the ps command? Many options to tailor its output.
I have the process running, I know it has been supplied with many
command line arguments.
Yet, both 'cat /proc//cmdline' and 'procstat -c ' only show
it's bare name, no arguments.
How can I see the full command line?
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebs
/var
move /usr/local/etc to /etc/local and make link from /etc/local to
/usr/local/etc
then you can have /usr readonly
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send a
On May 18, 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What are the rules dictating where core files are output? Is there a way to
> setup an output directory?
The sysctl(8) MIB controls core file generation. See core(5) for more
information.
To specify a particular location for your core files, you migh
understand that the procfs provides additional information about the
system's running processes. What are the benefits and disadvantages to using
this file system? It appears that the FreeBSD 7.0 Release does not enable
procfs by default. Why would someone want to enable this f
Hello everyone,
just a short question regarding truss - I did some googling and found
a reference to a conversation with proposed (working?) patch to
eliminate dependency on procfs. That was in April 2007:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2007-April/070574.html
Does anybody
Le Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:14:57 +0100,
"Fernando Apesteguía" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> As I know, FreeBSD has some kind of procfs but more limited in terms
> of information. My questions is how should I proceed now? I see two
> options.
>
> 1 - Try to rely t
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 05:16:42PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> On 03/01/2008, Fernando Apesteguía <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yes, that's my problem. In Linux I can get from /proc/cpuinfo for
> > example: name, model, stepping, cache size, clock speed, supported
> > extensions, etc...
> > But
On 03/01/2008, Fernando Apesteguía <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, that's my problem. In Linux I can get from /proc/cpuinfo for
> example: name, model, stepping, cache size, clock speed, supported
> extensions, etc...
> But using sysctl in FreeBSD (sysctl -a) I can only see name and vendor
> for
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 02:14:57PM +0100, Fernando Apesteguía wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First of all, Happy New Year.
>
> I have a question about porting an application from Linux to FreeBSD.
>
> The application I want to port, makes an extensive use of the procfs
> in Li
On Jan 3, 2008 2:47 PM, Ivan Voras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fernando Apesteguía wrote:
>
> > 1 - Try to rely the porting on the compatibility procfs from FreeBSD
> > 2 - Do the things in a completely different way (which one is this?
> > Invoking sysctl system
Fernando Apesteguía wrote:
> 1 - Try to rely the porting on the compatibility procfs from FreeBSD
> 2 - Do the things in a completely different way (which one is this?
> Invoking sysctl system call?)
>
> I would like to know from you which one is the best approach.
The best way
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fernando_Apestegu=EDa?= writes:
> First of all, Happy New Year.
And to you,
> The application I want to port, makes an extensive use of the
> procfs in Linux. It gathers a lot of information from those files
> (cpuinfo, meminfo, devices, filesystems,
Hi all,
First of all, Happy New Year.
I have a question about porting an application from Linux to FreeBSD.
The application I want to port, makes an extensive use of the procfs
in Linux. It gathers a lot of information from those files (cpuinfo,
meminfo, devices, filesystems, modules, etc
In Linux /proc//fd/ is a link to the file corresponding to FD opened by
process with process id PID.
But in FreeBSD I don't see /proc//fd at all.
How can I get the corresponding to FD file?
Thanks,
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
ht
etype filefpregs map mem note
> > > notepg
> > > regsrlimit status
> > > and in Linux:
> > > cmdline cpu cwd environ exe fd maps mem mounts root stat statm
> > > status
> > >
> > > Why there's such
atus
> > and in Linux:
> > cmdline cpu cwd environ exe fd maps mem mounts root stat statm
> > status
> >
> > Why there's such a difference in procfs interface to the process
> > information?
> >
> > In addition Linux has /
iron exe fd maps mem mounts root stat statm
> status
>
> Why there's such a difference in procfs interface to the process information?
>
> In addition Linux has /proc/self/ link which is named curproc in FreeBSD.
>
> Isn't it better to have the same interface
ce in procfs interface to the process information?
In addition Linux has /proc/self/ link which is named curproc in FreeBSD.
Isn't it better to have the same interface across the systems?
Tyanks,
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Thursday 31 August 2006 22:12, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Move this line down and place it after mounting of /usr.
Thanks.
That was actually one of the first things I tried, I guess I must have
screwed-up something else at the time.
___
freebsd-quest
ab.f
> # DeviceMountpoint FStype Options DumpPass#
> /dev/ad4s1b.bde noneswapsw 0 0
> /dev/ad6s1b.bde noneswapsw 0 0
> proc/proc procfs rw
noneswapsw 0 0
proc/proc procfs rw 0 0
linprocfs /compat/linux/proc linprocfs rw0 0
/dev/ad4s1a / ufs rw 1 1
/dev/ad4s1g /home ufs
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:44:39 +0100 RW wrote:
> On Thursday 31 August 2006 10:09, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:22:03 +0100 RW wrote:
> > Can't confirm that the problem exists:
> > $ uname -a
> > FreeBSD srv.sem.ipt.ru 6.1-STABLE FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #2: Wed May 17
> > 23:26:59 MS
>
> On Thursday 31 August 2006 10:09, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:22:03 +0100 RW wrote:
>
> > Can't confirm that the problem exists:
> > $ uname -a
> > FreeBSD srv.sem.ipt.ru 6.1-STABLE FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #2: Wed May 17
> > 23:26:59 MSD 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/us
On Thursday 31 August 2006 10:09, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:22:03 +0100 RW wrote:
> Can't confirm that the problem exists:
> $ uname -a
> FreeBSD srv.sem.ipt.ru 6.1-STABLE FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE #2: Wed May 17
> 23:26:59 MSD 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SRV i3
e possible to submit the output of 'dmesg' here?
BTW, are you also attempting to load 'proc'?
// fstab //
[...]
proc /proc procfsrw 00
// * //
--
Gerard Seibert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Think about it: The *average* American has one tit and one testicle.
_
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:22:03 +0100 RW wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 21:55, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> > RW wrote:
> > > What's the canonical way of mounting the Linux procfs at boot-time?
> > >
> > > I've seen several recommendations to a
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 21:55, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> RW wrote:
> > What's the canonical way of mounting the Linux procfs at boot-time?
> >
> > I've seen several recommendations to add the following to fstab:
> >
> > linproc/compat/linux/proc
RW wrote:
> What's the canonical way of mounting the Linux procfs at boot-time?
>
> I've seen several recommendations to add the following to fstab:
>
> linproc/compat/linux/proc linprocfs rw 0 0
>
> But in a standard installation, this mount-po
What's the canonical way of mounting the Linux procfs at boot-time?
I've seen several recommendations to add the following to fstab:
linproc/compat/linux/proc linprocfs rw 0 0
But in a standard installation, this mount-point is really under /usr, which
isn't mount
On 26 janv. 06, at 23:33, Dan Nelson wrote:
in that case, the command issued as a truss argument (ls, ...) is
stuck in state "D". `man ps` says it "Marks a process in disk (or
other short term, uninterruptible) wait."
these process wont be killed, I'll have to reboot. (procctl won't
clear the pr
In the last episode (Jan 26), Proniewski Patrick said:
> I have some new details :
>
> >>$ truss ls
> >>truss: cannot open /proc/4509/mem: No such file or directory
>
> in that case, the command issued as a truss argument (ls, ...) is
> stuck in state "D". `man ps` says it "Marks a proces
I have some new details :
$ truss ls
truss: cannot open /proc/4509/mem: No such file or directory
in that case, the command issued as a truss argument (ls, ...) is
stuck in state "D".
`man ps` says it "Marks a process in disk (or other short term,
uninterruptible) wait."
s 100% of the time
ktrace truss ls -> fail most of the time
truss `which ls` -> works great.
I have no idea why the PIOCWAIT ioctl would fail like that
neither have I... In fact, the 128 items limitation of my procfs
puzzles me even more.
thanks
Patrick PRONIEWSKI
--
Administ
In the last episode (Jan 26), Proniewski Patrick said:
> I experience a strange problem with truss on FreeBSD 5.4 p8 :
>
> $ truss ls
> truss: cannot open /proc/4509/mem: No such file or directory
> $ truss ls
> truss: PIOCWAIT: Input/output error
The child process probabl
Hello,
I experience a strange problem with truss on FreeBSD 5.4 p8 :
$ truss ls
truss: cannot open /proc/4509/mem: No such file or directory
$ truss ls
truss: PIOCWAIT: Input/output error
of course, PROCFS is mounted :
$ df procfs
Filesystem 1K
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 07:50:47PM +0200, martinko wrote:
> hi,
>
> i've been wondering long time what's the actual state of procfs in freebsd.
>
> yes, i added procfs line to fstab but i do not mount it automatically at
> system startup.
> yet i'm still abl
hi,
i've been wondering long time what's the actual state of procfs in freebsd.
yes, i added procfs line to fstab but i do not mount it automatically at
system startup.
yet i'm still able to use ps(1) unlike the originator of this thread.
how come?
i believe i've read so
That was it. Thanks.
Chris
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 12:26 -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 11:56:30PM -0500, Chris Radlinski wrote:
> > I'm running 5.4 Release. Whenever I run 'ps -ef' I get this message:
> >
> > ps: Process environment r
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 11:56:30PM -0500, Chris Radlinski wrote:
> I'm running 5.4 Release. Whenever I run 'ps -ef' I get this message:
>
> ps: Process environment requires procfs(5)
>
> My kernel config contains these two lines:
>
> options PROCFS
That fixed it. Thanks.
Chris
Tobias Fendin wrote:
You have to mount it. Add this line to /etc/fstab:
proc/proc procfs rw 0 0
And then run:
mount /proc
You might also check out the man-page: procfs(9)
//Tobias
On Saturday 21 May 2005 21:56, the author Chris Radlinski contributed to the
dialogue on procfs in 5.4:
& I'm running 5.4 Release. Whenever I run 'ps -ef' I get this message:
&
& ps: Process environment requires procfs(5)
&
& My kernel config contains these tw
Chris Radlinski wrote:
I should have procfs. However, my /proc directory is empty.
What gives?
You have to mount it. Add this line to /etc/fstab:
proc/proc procfs rw 0 0
And then run:
mount /proc
You might also check out the man-page: procfs(9)
//Tobias
I'm running 5.4 Release. Whenever I run 'ps -ef' I get this message:
ps: Process environment requires procfs(5)
My kernel config contains these two lines:
options PROCFS # Process filesystem (requires
PSEUDOFS)
options PSEUDOFS
At 10:08 PM -0700 8/17/04, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 09:14:06PM -0700, Dennis George wrote:
Hi all,
> Can I disable PROCFS (through kernel configuration[sysctl/GENERIC] )
> in freeBSD
Yes. It's clear from the GENERIC config how to do this
(remove the entry)
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 09:14:06PM -0700, Dennis George wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Can I disable PROCFS (through kernel configuration[sysctl/GENERIC] ) in freeBSD
Yes. It's clear from the GENERIC config how to do this (remove the entry)).
> If yes then what will the effect of
Hi all,
Can I disable PROCFS (through kernel configuration[sysctl/GENERIC] ) in freeBSD If
yes then what will the effect of this ???
I mean to say that, do we really need the PROCFS ? If I disable it will I get any
improvement in system performance in terms of speed ?
Dennis
I have a system running 5.1-RELEASE-p2 with several jails. Occasionally
I want to determine which jail a given process belongs to. On -STABLE
I could just cat /proc//status and look at the final entry. But
with 5.x procfs id deprecated; so I'd like to find some other way. Any
help wou
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:42:49PM -0700, Josh Brooks wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> As I am sure many have noticed, a default installation of 5.1-RELEASE will
> leave you with no procfs mounted at /proc, and no entry in /etc/fstab for
> a procfs.
>
> Is this by design ?
Yes
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:42:49PM -0700, Josh Brooks typed:
>
> Hello,
>
> As I am sure many have noticed, a default installation of 5.1-RELEASE will
> leave you with no procfs mounted at /proc, and no entry in /etc/fstab for
> a procfs.
>
> Is this by design ?
Yes
&
Hello,
As I am sure many have noticed, a default installation of 5.1-RELEASE will
leave you with no procfs mounted at /proc, and no entry in /etc/fstab for
a procfs.
Is this by design ?
Is it better to not run /proc on 5.x ?
What are the consequences of running without a procfs on 5.x ?
OR
51 matches
Mail list logo
