Re: sysutils/lsof Author Question (for CLANG)....

On 2012-11-08 16:41, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> [Text formatting recovered]
>
> On Thursday,  8 November 2012 at  9:23:11 -0600, Larry Rosenman 
> wrote:
>> On 2012-11-08 09:20, Edward Tomasz Napiera??a wrote:
>>> Wiadomo???? napisana przez Andriy Gapon w dniu 8 lis 2012, o godz. 
>>> 15:17:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Note that fstat(8) does not report file paths. On the other hand,
>>> procstat(8) does.  It looks like "procstat -fa" and "procstat -va"
>>> together provide the same information lsof(8) does; unfortunately
>>> there doesn't seem to be a way to show a "merged" output for files
>>> opened (-f) and files mmapped, but closed (-v).
>
> Hmm.  I don't know the details, but potentially there *would* be a
> more kosher way of doing what lsof wants.
>
>> Remember also that lsof is portable between MANY flavors of *nix.
>
> Only because the author goes to a lot of effort to make it so.
> There's special-case code for most kernels.  In the case of FreeBSD,
> it would make sense to use documented interfaces where possible, and
> create them where they don't exist.

And if we could get such a list and create them, Vic would use them I 
suspect.

We've tried before and it turns into a bikeshed.


>
> Greg
> --
> Sent from my desktop computer.
> Finger grog_at_FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
> See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
> This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
> problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua