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 g...@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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
