From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 3 21:18:18 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF52F106566B for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 21:18:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eitanadlerlist@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f213.google.com (mail-fx0-f213.google.com [209.85.220.213]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73AF28FC1A for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 21:18:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm5 with SMTP id 5so1768261fxm.35 for ; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:18:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=2vCRrfXFE9VOW11bo3rJCaPc4se5C2j4fs8hqPnPdr0=; b=AFT7dXFRJ0Ab0ZpbYAzNUrmzNMNcrPH3E623KcCz1bpF8m8KdL0os/krEBDSXIiE8y XHfJwbx6a3POWiB31nLOCsuGj1cu7fWX/87AncFDEw5Yahq6CucI+4K1uzWssqEN69Xf f2frUNl8GSSOmep+Sl7EkgSnPgVxzBPJgIX4o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=Zo/e/0YX0dbhA9yG8ggk2OpQLnpsG7Y4qQlrx2OmFNaHt4o9Kdk5exzbVRCNmP7DAD jQuwtEvMpdqSjrarLpktWzbm8w1FjCnmjkYSfrdoq4YOloZugMXSKviDE4kEqdzO1ane 6IkcmZN8BIhE0lFrCgpvaWeZrl4JyEYDdfjZY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.239.185.83 with SMTP id b19mr16783hbh.75.1265231896239; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:18:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Eitan Adler Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 23:17:54 +0200 Message-ID: To: jhell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [patch] pkill verbose option 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: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:18:18 -0000 Yeah - I wasn't sure what else to use. Does the -V work as intended? Is this a worthwhile patch? IMHO the biggest problem with unix system commands is the lack of constancy of the flags. On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:58 PM, jhell wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:52, jhell@ wrote: > >> >> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:00, eitanadlerlist@ wrote: >> >>> I added an option to pkill which lists what processes it kills and what >>> signal is sent. If no signals are sent it prints out the same message >>> killall does. >>> >>> >> Unfortunately that patch works but has unintended operation that can be >> seen with the following. >> >> sleep 1000 & >> pkill sleep >> No matching processes belonging to you were found >> [1]+ Terminated: 15 sleep 10000 >> >> It then kills sleep and still prints no processes belong to you message. >> >> Now pkill -v sleep on my system actually causes my Xserver to exit with a >> unexpected signal 15. >> >> Without the patches it works as it should... >> >> Overhead endured. >> >> >> > Ugh! ignore the pkill -v comment. Should have noticed the -V instead. > > > -- > > jhell > >