Date: 25 Mar 2004 17:14:23 -0500 From: Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sf.net> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: PATCH for a more-POSIX `ps', and related adventures Message-ID: <1080252862.2255.1141.camel@cube> In-Reply-To: <p0602047dbc88f7743c8e@[128.113.24.47]> References: <1080165171.2232.910.camel@cube> <20040325191745.GB71731@stack.nl> <1080247208.2232.1095.camel@cube> <p0602047dbc88f7743c8e@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 16:07, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 3:40 PM -0500 3/25/04, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> >
> >Also, I'd be happy to support a FreeBSD-compatible "Z" if you
> >can properly describe it to me.
>
> This description from the source might help (since I have not
> written the man-page entry for it yet. Ahem...):
'Z' != 'X'
Thanks for the "X" info though. Supporting "X" this way
would be seriously hard for me. I could do it as a final
filter, but then "p" would be affected. I could add it
into the table that does the non-list selection options,
but then the list-based selections wouldn't be filtered.
(my "-p 123" is affected if-and-only-if "-g 123" is too)
I suppose the whole point is to filter processes out
of the listed selections? This seems to be quite a bit
of complexity for little gain. It looks like you're
headed toward something that might best be done like:
ps --match="ruid in 1,1000,1082 && tty!=NOTTY"
(instead of approaching it hack-by-hack over the years)
I think "ps xX" should be an error, and maybe "ps xx" too.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1080252862.2255.1141.camel>