Re: Bug#1931: "less" doesn't work on /proc files
On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Bruce Perens wrote:
> Note that "ls" lists the length of /proc/filesystems
> as "0", but read() will get more than 0 data. Less doesn't know that
> /proc files are special in this way, and treats them as a 0-length file.
> You could argue that this is a bug in the semantics of the proc filesystem.
> For now, I think we should fix "less" to not abandon any attempt to read a
> file when stat() says it's 0-length.
I do so argue. However, I've uploaded an updated a.out less package
with a hacked-in workaround for this.
Would the kernel package maintainer please report this as a bug to
the kernel group? Both stat() and lseek() seem to be broken for
proc filesystem files.