Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:42:14 -0200 From: Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez <rnsanchez@wait4.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Max Laier <max@love2party.net>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: sensors fun.. Message-ID: <20071019174214.e8672336.rnsanchez@wait4.org> In-Reply-To: <20071018120730.N60783@fledge.watson.org> References: <55408.1192704998@critter.freebsd.dk> <20071018120730.N60783@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:17:01 +0100 (BST) Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > However, this does range a bit far afield from the thread topic. The > basic point I was making is that sysctl offers a more semantically > rich and, to be honest, better defined way of interacting with live > subsystems than device files do in a generic sense. You can hammer > down semantics for device nodes, but the code associated with sysctl > is much simpler when the goal is to offer mib-like semantics even in > quite simple cases (integer set/put). And there's even a MIB for that (perhaps someone even pointed it already): http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3433.txt Regards. -- Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez rnsanchez@wait4.org Powered by FreeBSD "Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071019174214.e8672336.rnsanchez>