Kernel messages since a certain time and hide the hardware specs from users
will be achieved the same way, suppose you have a parameter for dmesg that
prints the current buffer and then clears it.
I don't think it is a silly knob, in fact it may be the only knob you can
have, dmesg holds messages/texts, you can print it, and you can clear it,
other than that may be a silly knob.
Possible uses for this ?, you bet people will find them, the whole idea of
unix is to have specialized tools you can put together to do great things,
in this case dmesg will be doing that has to do with kernel messages, but
your approach is to relay on external mechanisms to accomplish something
that dmesg can do easily, see HP-UX for example, and the fact that other
important unix flavors use this knob.
Also, consider the security factor, you can hide information from users as
Stuart pointed out.
>From my stand point it is useful and appropriate, if you have to rewrite
kernel code it may otherwise.
On 7/5/07, Stuart Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 2007/07/05 06:42, Nick Holland wrote:
> > Yes, there are benefits to looking at the change in the dmesg. I do NOT
> > like the idea of CLEARING this most valuable resource,
> however. Whatever
> > you wish to accomplish this way can be easily accomplished in some other
> > way, I think.
>
> The OP needs to say *what* they would like to achieve (e.g. 'only
> list kernel messages since a certain time', or 'hide the hardware spec
> from users'), rather than think up a possible way to do it (i.e.
> 'clear dmesg output').
>
>
--
You should be the change that you want to see in the world.
- Gandhi
