On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Skip Ford wrote:


> How about renaming procstat(1) to proc(1), rolling up all of

calling it proc(1), I think, is actually not a good idea either. That
is way more confusing for people who still think about /proc and do
not know the difference between (1) or (4).

I like the procstat as it aligns well with other things like
fstat netstat sockstat systat vmstat gstat iostat pmcstat ...

I admit we also have some *info tools like ffsinfo/diskinfo/rpcinfo/..
but ``pinfo'' seems to better fit the *stat category of tools;-)

I am not able to find anything but a simple "C wrapper" for
/proc/*/stat for linux on the web easily (which I suppose could as well
be a sh skript) and cannot even find something like procstat on the
linux machines I have access to. But there seems to be a procinfo that
seems to as well extract information from /proc/ on linux. So having
pinfo or procinfo might more confuse people to expect something
differently and even worse might mean to be the same tool with
compatible command line.

While thinking we should try to aling with other OSes and not confuse
users coming from non-BSD worlds, procstat to mee seems to be the
thing that would best fit for our tree.


Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT
Software is harder than hardware so better get it right the first time.
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"