Re: FreeBSD 5.3 setup help

Chris Vetter wrote:
> [...]
> 
>>You've made you point clear that you dislike the usage of procfs.  The 
>>question remains, do we have a /dependency/ that leads to certain 
>>features of the API not functioning on FreeBSD?
> 
> [...]
> 
> I never said the API wouldn't work on FreeBSD.
> 
> I said, even though there is no /proc on FreeBSD 5.x, you can always
> use --disable-proc (or something similar) on 'configure' since BSD
> does have libkvm.

Yes, which, at the current moment, has a bug which makes *IT* dependent 
on /proc. Pascal Hofstee(sp?) is aware of this issue and is trying to 
make a patch to libkvm. Jeremy Tregunna(sp?) said that if Pascal doesn't 
get a patch whipped up in a reasonable amount of time, he will do so 
himself. This bug requires that, on FreeBSD 5+, /proc be mounted during 
GNUstep compilation (and possibly even after it, although I'm not sure 
about it) because libkvm itself has some sort of messed up and broken 
/proc dependency when certain API calls are used.

> The problem with NSProcessInfo is, that if libkvm does NOT exist, and
> tries /proc instead, it most likely will fail, because NSProcessInfo
> tries to open and read file '/proc/<pid>/cmdline' which may well exist
> on Linux, but does not necessarily exist on other systems. Or if it does,
> it does not necessarily have the expected information.

As far as I know, this was fixed long ago, Chris. Maybe you've been 
checked out for a while from active GNUstep development, or maybe I'm 
wrong, but I think Pascal fixed this. He did a lot of stuff to get 
GNUstep working more properly under FreeBSD.

> On a side note regarding NSProcessInfo+load:
> The arguments passed to kvm_open() differ from what Solaris' kvm_open()
> expects and kvm_getprocs() doesn't even exist on Solaris. Contrary to
> what the opening comment states about being compatible.

*shrug* so much for standards