On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Srdjan Todorovic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22 June 2010 14:15, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > i'm in the middle of writing a lesson regarding the proc filesystem
> > and i was wondering about any compelling reasons to *not* select the
> > proc filesystem for the kernel you're building if you're working with
> > a fairly new kernel source tree.
> >
> > the only reason i can come up with is if you're building a *really*
> > tiny embedded system that is stripped and minimal to the point where
> > it's unnecessary, but even *that* doesn't sound convincing.
>
> Perhaps if you only ever had one user process running (init?) and
> you never wanted to run ps...
>
> Surely procfs isn't that big as to justify removing it on size
> constraints?
i agree -- i was just wondering if there were any unusual
circumstances i was overlooking.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Top-notch, inexpensive online Linux/OSS/kernel courses
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
