Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:18:55 +1000 From: Stephen McKay <smckay@internode.on.net> To: harti@freebsd.org Cc: Stephen McKay <smckay@internode.on.net> Subject: Re: posix ps (was Re: Adding `pgrep' and `pkill' to /usr/bin) Message-ID: <200403290918.i2T9Itsv006700@dungeon.home> In-Reply-To: <20040329105719.E13220@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> from Harti Brandt at "Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:04:47 %2B0200" References: <p0602046abc879c5fe2f9@[128.113.24.47]> <20040325070120.GA67497@VARK.homeunix.com> <1a9c01c41359$b3da45e0$7890a8c0@dyndns.org> <p06020494bc8a5738af2f@[128.113.24.47]> <200403280808.i2S88aJ7016011@dungeon.home> <20040328184244.I10175@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200403290042.i2T0g2sv003657@dungeon.home> <20040329091900.Y12618@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200403290830.i2T8Ujsv006376@dungeon.home> <20040329105719.E13220@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 29th March 2004, Harti Brandt wrote: >I'm all with you on this. I said all this under the proposition that we >want to keep BSD syntax that conflicts with Posix. Sure, I'd rather simply >move to posix. (The only thing I'd want to retain is 'ps ax' :-) OK. :-) That means that (as far as the two of us is concerned at least) the issue is whether or not we want to be posix conformant. I've always been of the opinion that we should be posix compatible when that is convenient, and ignore it otherwise. I *think* that is the general consensus among FreeBSD developers too, but that impression may be a few years out of date now. Anyway, this looks like the end of this thread, and I'm off to look for a FreeBSD "standards" list to check if there is anything interesting in the archives that could be considered an official policy on posix conformance. Cheers, Stephen.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403290918.i2T9Itsv006700>