Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2002 12:36:07 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: shm status
Message-ID: <20020609163607.GD26171@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <072501c20fb8$8d16dc80$6132bc3e AT BABEL>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <072501c20fb8$8d16dc80$6132bc3e@BABEL>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 02:21:22PM +0100, Conrad Scott wrote:
>Also the ipcs and ipcrm utitilities are really useful when working with sysv
>ipc so I also thought I could start by adding these. Presumably this would
>be a case for another cygwin_internal() interface? i.e. get the list of ids;
>the program then issues xxxctl() calls to get the relevant details or rm the
>requested objects. Any objections to such an approach? (Just for comparison,
>the usual Un*x implementation involves reading kernel memory via /dev/kmem.)

Do we need a cygwin_internal interface?  How do OSes like linux do this?

Maybe it makes sense to start exposing things via the /proc interface, if that
is the way linux does it.

cgf