Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:42:15 +0200 From: Alexey Shuvaev <shuvaev@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de> To: Brian Somers <brian@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Ivan Radovanovic <rivanr@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Deprecating ps(1)s -w switch Message-ID: <20090825124215.GA80035@wep4035.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de> In-Reply-To: <20090825034054.2d57e733@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> References: <20090825034054.2d57e733@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:40:54AM -0700, Brian Somers wrote: > I recently closed bin/137647 and had second thoughts after Ivan (the > originator) challenged my reason for closing it. > > The suggestion is that ps's -w switch is a strange artifact that can > be safely deprecated. ps goes to great lengths to implement width > limitations, and any time I've seen people not using -ww has either > been a mistake or doesn't matter. Using 'cut -c1-N' is also a great > way of limiting widths if people really want that... > > I'd like to propose changing ps so that width limits are removed and > '-w' is deprecated - ignored for now with a note in the man page > saying that it will be removed in a future release. > Do you want to remove '-w' switch preserving '-ww' one? IMO this seems awkward. Also, by ignoring it for now do you mean that behavior of ps with '-w' switch would be the same as without it? I would prefer that '-w' == '-ww'. One can remove all references to multiple 'w' switches from the man page but leave ps itself insensitive to any number of 'w' switches (so '-w' == '-ww' == '-www' == ...). This also would be consistent with (for example) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ps&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=Red+Hat+Linux%2Fi386+9&format=html > Does anyone have any objections to doing this? I don't propose > merging this back into stable/8. > 0.02$, Alexey.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090825124215.GA80035>