Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:29:17 +0900 (JST) From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org> To: kris@obsecurity.org Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/gkrellm Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <20010131.022917.85414014.ume@mahoroba.org> In-Reply-To: <20010130085013.B51965@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200101301206.f0UC6xw19361@freefall.freebsd.org> <20010130085013.B51965@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:50:13 -0800
>>>>> Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> said:
> If linprocfs is available, this version works with no extra kmem
> privilege under 5.0-CURRENT. In this time, since we cannot obtain
> swap information by safety way, when gkrellm cannot access kmem,
> gkrellm tries to use linprocfs for swap information.
kris> Argh, the slippery slope begins!
Actually, I don't want to use linprocfs. However, I believe secure is
important than don't use linprocfs. Please attention that GKrellM is
GTK+ apps. It's still workaround. Once swap information can be
obtained via safety way, I'll wipe out using linprocfs.
kris> We need to make this information available via regular procfs (you
kris> sure it's not already?) Native applications *should not* need to use
kris> linprocfs.
Linux's /proc is far from BSD's /proc. It is rather close to kernfs.
I think making /proc closer to Linux's /proc is not good idea. The
lacking information are ksw_used and ksw_total of struct kvm_swap
obtained via kvm_getswapinfo(). I wonder these can be obtained via
sysctl().
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
ume@mahoroba.org ume@bisd.hitachi.co.jp ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010131.022917.85414014.ume>