emo/procps
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Activity

crossed the Rubicon, and no, it wasn't fun

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
albert
2002-10-06 21:34:17 +00:00
parent 97bf45a12b
commit 118854162d
12 changed files with 28 additions and 38 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

32
BUGS
View File

@@ -9,16 +9,21 @@ documentation!
Where to send
=============
Send comments, bug reports, patches, etc., to acahalan@cs.uml.edu
Send comments, bug reports, patches, etc., to albert@users.sf.net
What to send
============
It is much more useful to me if a program really crases to recompile it
It is much more useful to me if a program really crashes to recompile it
with make "CC=gcc -ggdb -O", run it with "gdb prog" and "run" and send
me a stack trace ('bt' command). That said, any bug report is still
better than none.
strace and ltrace output are very helpful:
strace -o output-file ps --blah
bzip2 output-file
It might be nice to get rid of miscellaneous compiler warnings, but
don't bend over backwards to do it.
@@ -33,29 +38,20 @@ code was compiled.
A macro is provide in libproc/version.h to construct the code from its
components, e.g.
if (linux_version_code < LINUX_VERSION(1,1,30))
/* tty field is only a minor */
if (linux_version_code < LINUX_VERSION(2,5,41))
/* blah blah blah */
A startup call to set_linux_version may also be necessary.
Of course, if a bug is due to a change in kernel file formats, it would
be best to first try to generalize the parsing, since the code is then
more resilient against future change.
If you send me patches which are specific to *compiling* on a particular
version of Linux include a "#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE > 1*0x10000+3*0x100+54"
markup of the patch so that the package may be compiled with older
kernels as well as the "latest and greatest". LINUX_VERSION_CODE is
#define'd in <linux/version.h>.
Note that you should not make patches specific to *compiling* on a
particular version of Linux unless there is nothing else you can do.
Also unified diffs (diff -u) are my preference, context diffs (diff -c )
are kind of usable, and standard diffs (diff) are more useless than a
generic text description of what you did. Just use
diff -u oldfile newfile
diff -Naurd oldfile newfile
or
diff -Naur old-procps-dir new-procps-dir
diff -Naurd old-procps-dir new-procps-dir
to create your diffs and you will make me happy. Also make sure to
include a description of what the diff is for or I'm likely to ignore
it because of general lack of time...
@@ -63,12 +59,8 @@ it because of general lack of time...
Code Structure
==============
My ultimate goal for this package is to be compilable with any kernel
headers and to be able to run under any kernel's /proc. (Don't bother
telling me that I'm not especially close to my ultimate goal... who
is? :-)
Anyhow, another goal is to encapsulate *all* parsing dependent on /proc
A goal is to encapsulate *all* parsing dependent on /proc
file formats into the libproc library. If the API is general enough
it can hopefully stabilize and then /proc changes might only require
updating libproc.so. Beyond that having the set of utilities be simple