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

["Julian Reschke" <reschke@muenster.de>]

> From: owner-mint@gfanrend.fishpool.fi
> [mailto:owner-mint@gfanrend.fishpool.fi]On Behalf Of Konrad M.
> Kokoszkiewicz
> Sent: Monday, November 15, 1999 4:45 PM
> To: Guido Flohr
> Cc: MiNT mailing list
> Subject: Re: [MiNT] Was: /proc, will be: /sys
>
>
>
> > I have therefore started (in fact I'm relatively far with that) a new
> > pseudo-filesystem called "/sys" which has many features from the "/proc"
> > filesystem used on Linux.  Inside "/sys" there is a subdirectory (named
> > after the process id) for each process in the system.  This subdirectory
> > contains all the information you want in form of human-readable
> files, for
> > example
> >
> > 	bash-2.03$ cat /sys/123/cmdline | tr '\0' ' '
> > 	find / -name *.tmp -print
> > 	bash-2.03$ cat /sys/123/environ | tr '\0' '\n'
> > 	USER=guido
> > 	PWD=/home/guido
> > 	TERM=tw52
> > 	...
> >
> > There are many more files than "cmdline" and "environ", you will be able
> > to retrieve every information the kernel itself has about the process.
> >
> > If you are lucky (and if I find some more time) one of the next MiNT
> > versions will feature this pseudo-filesystem.
>
> This may be off topic, but keeping in mind the recent implementation of
> SLBs (which formally behave like stopped processes), I would think about
> either a /proc extension (to make possible to differentiate an SLB from a
> real process after SIGSTOP) or /lib folder, though I don't quite like the

Are we talking about the file attributes which currently encode the run
state? Why not just invent a new one?

> latest concept (since we are not for an active promotion of the SLB
> concept... btw. do any SLBs exist in the MagiC world, which could work in
> MiNT? any docs? F.e. EDITOBJC.SLB, or whatever it is called, relies on
> MagiC AES so no real use...)

The latest release of my Mupfel tools was tested against both MagiC and
MetaDOS+SLBLOAD, and should work if MiNT's implementation is compatible.

The SLBLOAD distribution also comes with a sample library (in source).

> Anyways, after playing a bit with SLBs in MiNT and MagiC 6.0, I could say
> (and this sounds like a sort of life's irony) that Gryfs implementation is
> better than the original.

Is this already in a public beta of MiNT? The issue is that the mentioned
restriction regarding SLBPATH will probably prevent existing code from
running...