>Hmm.  Some changes were already made by atatat but I think I will go ahead 
>with my changes anyway.  He changed Pxxx to Kxxx in kernfs (inconsistently - 
>Pkern was changed to Kern instead of Kkern) and I think that more description 
>(KFSxxx and PFSxxx) makes more sense.

you know...when i looked at Kkern, it just didn't look right, that's
why it's different.  :)

>Also, I want to change the procfs as well.  That guarantees that nothing was 
>missed because the old name will fail at compile.  That's just in case there 
>is a conditional compile somewhere that doesn't get defined in my 
>environment.

oh...sigh.

>I will also add the #ifdef _KERNEL encapsulation to the procfs header.  
>Interestingly it was already in the kernfs header.  I wonder why I saw the 
>conflict in the first place that started this whole thing.  Is it possible 
>that lsof defines _KERNEL so that it can find those structures?  Anyway, I 
>think that this makes for cleaner code so I will make these changes.

yes, lsof does define _KERNEL to get to that stuff, and a lot of other
stuff, too.  drat.  that means i have to go fix lsof again.  well, at
least this is all happening close together temporally...

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
werdna@squooshy.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."