RE: [MiNT] /proc

[Jo-Even.Skarstein@gjensidige.no]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:reschke@muenster.de]
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 1999 9:59 AM
> To: gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de; mint@gfanrend.fishpool.fi
> Subject: RE: [MiNT] /proc
> 
> > proposal of using a mint.cnf keyword (and an Ssystem() opcode in
> > addition) for setting the path sounds very reasonable to me.
> >
> > I therefore ask again: Any objections agains this proposal?
> 
> Yes:
> 
> a) it is really not compatible enough with the other two 
> implementations,

Please refresh my memory...

> b) it doesn't the support the concept of different search paths for
> different implementations.

Now I'm confused... My understanding was that this was the searchlist for
the *kernel*, and that it will only be used when the client didn't use an
absolute path when opening the library. Why would clients need this? Sure,
you can read it so you can search it yourself if you can't find anything in
the custom search-path, but why do this if the kernel evaluates SLBPATH
itself?

> b) has anybody thought about a way how to retrieve a list of 
> processes that
> currently use a particular SLB?

Why not use an Ioctl on /proc? Oh, I forgot, that will probably compromise
security and we will have to remove the multituser-features because they're
useless anyway :-(

Jo Even Skarstein