sysfs and proc do I need both?

I just got done installing LFS 5.0 a little while ago with kernel-2.6.5. As you can see I didn't exactly follow the book, but I've built LFS before. Everything is currently working fine. However, I have both proc and sysfs mounted for everything to be ok.  Do I need both? They seem sort of the same. I need sysfs for my wireless card to work, and I need proc for modprobe, lsmod, etc. to work to install the module for my card in the first place.

Basicly my two questions are:
1. Is there a patch for module-init-tools to use /sys, or hotplug to use /proc
2. Does it matter that they are both running (speed, mem usage, or just plain cleanliness)

Thanks for any help, or links.
Jon
Jonman364Asked:
Who is Participating?

[Webinar] Streamline your web hosting managementRegister Today

x
 
karlwilburConnect With a Mentor Commented:
I'd just keep both running.  Doesn't use much extra speed, mem usage, etc.  I agree with jlevie.

Have you posted this to the Linux From Scratch mailing list (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/mail.html) and/or check the LFS FAQ (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/).  If so, what did you find there?

I found this, it might help:
http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/hints/2004-March/002417.html

-Karl
0
 
jlevieCommented:
While it would be cleaner to only be using one of the two, there's no problem with both being present. At worst there's a very slight increase in I/O load from the duplication.
0
 
Jonman364Author Commented:
Thanks for that last link.

<snip>
Sysfs Init Script
...
   It's new, though, so I am not sure if anything else uses it aside from udev.
</snip>

So I guess I doo need both for the time being. Thank you both for your comments.
Jon
0
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.