On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:42:49PM -0700, Josh Brooks typed: > > Hello, > > As I am sure many have noticed, a default installation of 5.1-RELEASE will > leave you with no procfs mounted at /proc, and no entry in /etc/fstab for > a procfs. > > Is this by design ?
Yes > Is it better to not run /proc on 5.x ? Securitywise, absolutely > What are the consequences of running without a procfs on 5.x ? I believe there's still some work going on to make a program like truss(8) not use the /proc interface, but otherwise all normal utilities are clean. > > OR > > > Was this just a bug/oversight in the 5.1-RELEASE, and in reality we should > definitely be running a procfs and have an entry in /etc/fstab, etc. ? > > > This is with the GENERIC kernel, but other kernels I build with PROCFS > also do not result in a procfs existing either - I always have to manually > mount it. > > > Any commnts of any kind related to the design decision that may have been > behind this - or any explanation of a kind as to why the 5.1-RELEASE has > no procfs mounted or in fstab by default is much apprecaited! This has been discussed on the mailing lists extensively. Search the archieves. -Ruben > thanks! > > _______________________________________________ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
