On 11/8/2012 8:17 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 08/11/2012 01:00 Greg 'groggy' Lehey said the following: >> On Wednesday, 7 November 2012 at 16:35:22 -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> On 2012-11-07 15:39, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, 7 November 2012 at 10:32:23 -0500, Benjamin Kaduk >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Once again, attempting to use kernel internals outside of the >>>>> supported interfaces is just asking for trouble; I do not understand >>>>> why this message is not sinking in over the course of your previous >>>>> mails to these lists, so I will not try to belabor it further. >>>> >>>> IIRC lsof is a special case that always needs to be built with >>>> intimate knowledge of the kernel. >>> >>> This is VERY true. Since some of the information lsof uses has >>> no API/ABI/KPI/KBI to get, it grovels around in the kernel. >> >> And until those interfaces are provided, I think this is legitimate. >> If there's anybody out there who hasn't used lsof, you should try it. >> It's good. > > Just curious why lsof can't use interfaces that e.g. fstat/sockstat/etc use? > Those base utilities do not seem to experience as much trouble as lsof. > > BTW, it is still beyond me why VOP_WRITE could be of any interest to userland code > even for such a utility as lsof. > Honestly, if you do not like the way lsof does things, I'm sure patches are welcome.. -- Chuck Burns <break19_at_gmail.com>Received on Thu Nov 08 2012 - 13:26:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:32 UTC