processes
in [Linux Help]
|
Prev: anti-virus
Next: New distro's site
From: Loki Harfagr on 18 Feb 2010 08:10 Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:35:09 +0000, SM did cat : > 2010-02-18, Steve Ackman skribis: >> In <3sZen.66141$Db2.22198(a)edtnps83>, on Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:35 GMT, >> Dave Krebes, dkrebes(a)gmail.com wrote: >>> And what is in the "proc" directory? >> >> Different on every system. To see what's in yours... >> >> $ cd /proc >> $ ls -l >> >> > Unnecessary use of cd ;) maybe not, imagine you're not looking what you think you're looking at, e-g: $ cd / $ mkdir -p PROc/{a,b,c,d} $ ln -s PROc PROC $ ls -l PROC $ cd PROC && $ ls -l
From: Robert Newson on 18 Feb 2010 13:01 Loki Harfagr wrote: > Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:35:09 +0000, SM did cat : > >> 2010-02-18, Steve Ackman skribis: >>> In <3sZen.66141$Db2.22198(a)edtnps83>, on Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:35 GMT, >>> Dave Krebes, dkrebes(a)gmail.com wrote: >>>> And what is in the "proc" directory? >>> Different on every system. To see what's in yours... >>> >>> $ cd /proc >>> $ ls -l >>> >> Unnecessary use of cd ;) > > maybe not, imagine you're not looking what you think you're looking at, e-g: > $ cd / > $ mkdir -p PROc/{a,b,c,d} > $ ln -s PROc PROC > $ ls -l PROC > $ cd PROC && $ ls -l Mefinx the suggestion was: $ ls -l /proc no need to cd at all ;)
From: J G Miller on 18 Feb 2010 13:17 On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:35 +0000, Dave Krebes wrote: > And what is in the "proc" directory? Nothing until you actually go and look in it.
From: SM on 18 Feb 2010 15:54 2010-02-18, Steve Ackman skribis: > In <slrnhnputs.8gn.kasmra(a)ananas.Sauna>, on Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:35:09 GMT, > SM, kasmra(a)ne-spamon.gmail.com wrote: >> >> Unnecessary use of cd ;) > > I think it's necessary to tailor the answer to the > student. Given the nature of the question, I would > suppose student might do > $ ls -l /proc > and, seeing subdirectories, he might then attempt > $ ls -l sub or > $ ls -l /sub both of which would naturally fail. Sure but what's the harm in failing? After failing a couple of times he/she might eventually learn it. It's better than developing a bad habit of first cd'ing into a directory and then listing the contents. > If the first instruction is 'cd /proc', those two > probable failure modes are eliminated... though > admittedly, nothing is absolutely idiot proof. ;-) That's for sure. -- kasmra :wq
From: Jasen Betts on 19 Feb 2010 03:05
On 2010-02-18, J G Miller <miller(a)yoyo.ORG> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:35 +0000, Dave Krebes wrote: > >> And what is in the "proc" directory? > > Nothing until you actually go and look in it. :) the best answer so far! --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- |