Re: LSB1.1: /proc/cpuinfo
Alan Cox <email@example.com>:
> > I disagree with this request. Files like /proc/cpuinfo are very helpful
> > for autoconfigurastion and cluster management. LSB's constituency would
> > be better served by more such information, not less.
> The question is whether programs should be parsing it. Right now glibc
> relies on it for certain things. We need /proc/cpuinfo if only for back
> compatibility. Documenting it has the disadvantage people will try to parse
> it, while not documenting it has the advantage that it can be provided to
> the pet human which generally has better error handling.
I grant your implied point.
However, I think it's worth noting that the nature of the languages
used to do the parsing is changing. Nowadays it's less likely to be C
munching individual bytes and more likely to be Perl or Python
slinging regexp matches, which makes the programs a bit less sensitive to
format variations or misunderstandings.
<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of
the barrel of a gun.'
-- Mao Tse-tung, 1938, inadvertently endorsing the Second Amendment.