[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys

To: <gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>, "MiNT mailing list" <mint@fishpool.com>
Subject: RE: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
From: "Julian Reschke" <reschke@muenster.de>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:46:21 +0100
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <19991112164008.A17590@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>
Reply-to: <reschke@muenster.de>
Sender: owner-mint@fishpool.com

> Of course, but if not, it would still be possible to use the path passed
> to Pexec() as a "fallback".
> 
> IMO, it would be possible to offer both values via the
> Fcntl()-interface, perhaps using a new opcode. Besides, having called
> the existing one "PLOADINFO" is a bit misleading, at least I expect
> something different from that name ;)

Why? It contains INFOrmation about how a Process was LOADed...

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
  - From: Thomas Binder <gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>

References:
- Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
  - From: Thomas Binder <gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
Next by Date: Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
Next by thread: Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread