From owner-cvs-all Tue Apr 10 16:24:18 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (beastie.mckusick.com [209.31.233.184]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA0E37B423; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:24:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mckusick@mckusick.com) Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by beastie.mckusick.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA41663; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:22:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com) Message-Id: <200104102322.QAA41663@beastie.mckusick.com> To: Brian Somers Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ps ps.c Cc: Bruce Evans , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 07 Apr 2001 12:01:56 BST." <200104071101.f37B1ul55453@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 16:22:35 -0700 From: Kirk McKusick Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In general, I removed the fields that were pointers as they seemed rather useless to me on output. If there is a constituency out there that finds looking at kernel addresses to be useful, I have no objection to them being added back (provided that it is done in a way that follows the rules so that it does not break ps and friends). Kirk McKusick =-=-=-=-=-= To: Dima Dorfman , mckusick@FreeBSD.org Cc: Bruce Evans , Brian Somers , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ps ps.c In-Reply-To: Message from Dima Dorfman of "Sat, 07 Apr 2001 01:04:12 PDT." <20010407080412.E21673E09@bazooka.unixfreak.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 12:01:56 +0100 From: Brian Somers > Bruce Evans writes: > > On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Brian Somers wrote: > > > Log: > > > The sess column went away last December with v1.26 of keyword.c > > > Remove it from ``jfmt''. > > > > > > Forgotten by: mckusick > > > > This stomps on PR 26057, which contains more complete fixes. It's > > not clear whether the bug is the non-removal of the sess column and > > the sess keyword or the removal of the e_sess pointer. > > This particular commit doesn't really hurt anything. We just need to > decide whether there should be an e_sess (or ki_sess, now) pointer or > not. PR 26057, which you mention, contains a patch to add it back. > Although mckusick did explicitly say he was removing it in his > kproc_info commit, he didn't provide rationale. > > So, the question is: do we want a `sess' column? Personally I preferred it *with* the sess column (my change just removed an irritating error message - I use ``ps j'' all the time and have eventually gotten sick of seeing it). Kirk, do you have any objections to restoring sess ? > Regards, > > Dima Dorfman > dima@unixfreak.org Cheers. -- Brian Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message