From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed May 21 09:46:06 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA19934
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cypher.net (black@zen.pratt.edu [205.232.115.155])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA19927
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 21 May 1997 09:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from black@localhost) by cypher.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id MAA32364; Wed, 21 May 1997 12:08:51 -0400
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 12:08:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ben Black <black@zen.cypher.net>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: pure /proc ps?
In-Reply-To: <199705211640.JAA03427@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970521120749.17872N-100000@zen.cypher.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

so why does ps try to access anything other than /proc when i *don't* use 
those options?

On Wed, 21 May 1997, Terry Lambert wrote:

> > on solaris you can chmod -s /bin/ps and users are then only able to see 
> > their own processes because it is all based on /proc.  freebsd uses 
> > /dev/kmem and /dev/mem (in addition to /proc?) so that is not possible.
> > 
> > is there any hope of a pure /proc ps on freebsd?
> 
> % man ps
> PS(1)                        UNIX Reference Manual                       PS(1)
> 
> NAME
>      ps - process status
> 
> SYNOPSIS
>      ps [-aCcehjlmrSTuvwx] [-M core] [-N system] [-O fmt] [-o fmt] [-p pid]
>         [-t tty] [-U username] [-W swap]
> 
> Not as long as "-M core", "-N system", and "-W swap" exist to allow
> running ps against system-dump images.
> 
> 
> 					Terry Lambert
> 					terry@lambert.org
> ---
> Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> or previous employers.
>