Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 00:16:11 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ps ps.c Message-ID: <200104112316.f3BNGB549681@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> of "Wed, 11 Apr 2001 15:24:20 PDT." <20010411222421.39B3C3E09@bazooka.unixfreak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> writes:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
> >
> > > [ more to Brian than to Kirk ]
> > > If all that is needed is a uniquifier for sessions, then why not use
> > > the actual session ID itself: s_sid? It's already provided in
> > > kinfo_proc as ki_sid even, ps(1) just doesn't use it at the moment.
> > > That is probably much easier to parse than a kernel address.
> >
> > I agree that this would be better. In fact, Kirk added both ki_sid and
> > ki_tsid. He apparently just forgot to actually use them :-).
>
> Then we're all in agreement. Now all we need is a patch. See attached. :-)
>
> Dima Dorfman
> dima@unixfreak.org
I've committed your patch.
WRT the pstat side of things (``pstat -t'' shows the value of the
tty's t_session pointer), the cleanest and least intrusive thing
that comes to mind is to change t_session into a union and export
the tsession_id to userland instead of the t_session pointer.
Does anyone have any better suggestions ?
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>; <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104112316.f3BNGB549681>