surely you cannot have a truly portable system that enumerates "cpus" after all who says there has to be one? Do numerical or I/O co-processors count as cpus? unless the architecture is defined it makes no sense, and if the architecture is defined you may as well define something like /proc and if you want something like /proc /proc is more like it than anything else! Jeff
Phil Brutsche wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said... > > > Nope. We have to use some "C" or "C++" system/function call. Our > > programmers don't want to depend on the /proc file system being > > available. > > If you're looking for an OS independant way of doing such things (ie the > same between Linux, *BSD, Windows, BeOS, Solaris, etc) the interfaces > don't exist. > > On Linux the method for userspace to know about the hardware is to use the > files under /proc. That's what they're there for. > > BTW most system utilities require access to /proc anyway, making a Linux > system without /proc a pain in the butt to administer. IMO you have no > choice but to rely on it. > > Hope you don't need to rely on the processor features enumerated in > /proc/cpuinfo - it is not consistent for all architectures Linux supports > :( > > - -- > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > GPG fingerprint: 9BF9 D84C 37D0 4FA7 1F2D 7E5E FD94 D264 50DE 1CFC > GPG key id: 50DE1CFC > GPG public key: http://tux.creighton.edu/~pbrutsch/gpg-public-key.asc > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > iD8DBQE6LVh2/ZTSZFDeHPwRAsVdAKDhIY/B95acLSzy+NT/MoEmuDrxQQCgyens > h4tsm1+bNtT5c2VzLAwpPd8= > =fDby > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]