On 2014/09/07 11:15, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 10:05:23AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2014/09/06 23:39, Philip Guenther wrote: > > > > > > I just did a grep of an up to date ports tree and I didn't see anything > > > which would indicate a requirement for /proc/. Lots of patches removing > > > dependencies on Linux-like /proc/, but nothing in pkg/DESCR files or the > > > like that would warn you need /proc mounted. > > > > > > So, should I take it that deleting procfs won't break any ports? > > > > I looked into this before, and thought it was pretty safe to delete, > > though IIRC there were some people here running linux antivirus under > > emulation which I haven't tried myself, so I would like to give them > > chance to comment as to whether it's necessary for that. > > I am one of these people and no, /proc is not needed.
Thanks - I'm OK with removing procfs, then.
