From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Feb 17 21:12:25 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E65F0FC3A for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D2616CE8E for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id C08EEF0FC22; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:24 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF44BF0FC19 for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D8D46CE8A; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w1HLCIPv069335; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 13:12:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w1HLCI2k069334; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 13:12:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201802172112.w1HLCI2k069334@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: ps output line length change In-Reply-To: <201802172106.w1HL6hP3045437@slippy.cwsent.com> To: Cy Schubert Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 13:12:18 -0800 (PST) CC: Ian Lepore , mike@karels.net, arch@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:12:25 -0000 > In message <1518882702.72050.204.camel@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore writes: > > On Fri, 2018-02-16 at 18:03 -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: > > > In message <201802170046.w1H0kvxN032252@mail.karels.net>, Mike Karels?? > > > writes: > > > > > > > > [...] > > > Agreed. I also agree scripts that expect wide output without ww are?? > > > broken. However Linux ps, at least Red Hat, behaves the same. I believe?? > > > the change was made to be more Linux compatible and allow greater?? > > > portability. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do people think should be done? > > > That's a tough one. Break Linux compatibility or break BSD?? > > > compatibility? > > > > > > Generally Linux users use ps -ef which we don't support and columns are?? > > > different so, Linux compatibility is... well just isn't. > > > > > > My vote is to revert and have an environment variable with defaults,?? > > > e.g., PS=--linux or something similar. > > > > > > > > > > Linux compatibility is good and desirable, right up to the point where > > it stomps on BSD compatibility. ??I think we should revert to historic > > behavior. > > > > I'm agnostic about whether an env var is a good idea or not. ??I use the > > env vars for LESS and TOP and love the idea, but hate hate hate the > > names (I've fought with conflicts on the too-common name TOP multiple > > times over the years, most recently just last week my env var TOP > > confused some makefile that had a TOP var in it). ??Could the var be > > named something like PS_OPTS? > > Sure. I'm ok even if there is no Linux compatibility. If we choose an > environment variable, I'm ok with any name as long as it makes sense. > > However Solaris had (I haven't used Solaris since Solaris 9) /usr/ucb > for BSD compatible utilities. Should we consider something similar for > linux compatibility? We already ahve the whole linuxlator thing, if they want a linux ps cant they just.. um actually use a linux ps from /compat/linux? I know ps grovels around in a lot of internals but this would, imho, be the route to persue a "linux compatible" ps output. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org