From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 25 16:11:15 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 507BB1065690 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:11:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kientzle@freebsd.org) Received: from kientzle.com (kientzle.com [66.166.149.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25FC48FC15 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:11:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from root@localhost) by kientzle.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) id n7PFmZOD096920 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:48:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@freebsd.org) Received: from dark.x.kientzle.com (fw2.kientzle.com [10.123.1.2]) by kientzle.com with SMTP id a8vznym8w54skedf4c8r7bfxvw; for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:48:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4A9407D3.60006@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:48:35 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090601 SeaMonkey/1.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <20090825034054.2d57e733@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> <20090825134447.GM2829@hoeg.nl> <200908251609.09302.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> In-Reply-To: <200908251609.09302.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Deprecating ps(1)s -w switch X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:11:15 -0000 Jonathan McKeown wrote: > On Tuesday 25 August 2009 15:44:47 Ed Schouten wrote: >> * Brian Somers wrote: >>> I recently closed bin/137647 and had second thoughts after Ivan (the >>> originator) challenged my reason for closing it. >>> >>> The suggestion is that ps's -w switch is a strange artifact that can >>> be safely deprecated. ps goes to great lengths to implement width >>> limitations, and any time I've seen people not using -ww has either >>> been a mistake or doesn't matter. The difference between "ps", "ps -w", and "ps -ww" is pretty significant for Java, in particular. Java command lines are typically enormous (thank you, CLASSPATH) which makes "ps -ww" often more annoying than it's worth. I concur with another poster that the GNU ps approach for supporting multiple argument styles deserves consideration. Tim