Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 08:29:49 +0100 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> Cc: Darren Reed <darrenr@reed.wattle.id.au>, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sysctl descriptions Message-ID: <19167.915953389@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "10 Jan 1999 04:54:08 %2B0100." <xzpn23rvl3z.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <xzpn23rvl3z.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes: > >Please, think about how to implement it in-kernel as I have, then >think about how to implement it in userland. Remeber that KLDs can >have sysctls as well, and that sysctl nodes can even be created >dynamically, e.g. on a per-device basis. Dag-Erling, Could you take a break from this and we can discuss it in two or three days. I think you're not being rational right now. Sysctl descriptions is documentation stuff. No bit of code can read it for any other purpose than presentation as ASCII for the operator to read. There is NO reason whatsoever to load it with the kernel. Next thing you will what to stick documentation for all ioctl(2) calls into the kernel. KLD's could easily stick files into: /usr/share/doc/sysctl/desc/this/is/my/sysctl.txt with descriptions. Yes, I agree that sysctls should be better documented, No, I don't agree that there is any reason for wasting RAM on it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! 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?19167.915953389>