Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:59:01 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles+fbsd-standards@stack.nl> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: PATCH for a more-POSIX `ps', and related adventures Message-ID: <20040322155901.GA17891@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <p06020448bc824de07ab9@[128.113.24.47]> References: <p06020448bc824de07ab9@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 03:51:31PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > It started out that I just wanted to get rid of one message that > `ps' writes to stderr in -current but not in -stable. "As long as > I was there", I thought I'd add support for a comma-separated list > of processes for `ps -p' (as described in SUSv3). Alexey Dokuchaev > asked if this change got us much closer to POSIX/SUS. Now it did > get us a *little* closer, but in re-reading SUSv3 I realized that > I didn't get it (that one option) quite as close as I would like. > So, "as long as I was there", I figured I should try to come a > little closer. > Now, after about 30 consecutive "as long as I was there" small > projects, I have an update which: > [snip good stuff] > Adds the `-G gidlist' and '-g pgidlist' options of SYSv3. > (note that this replaced a null `-g' option...) Old BSD ps used to exclude process group leaders unless `-g' or `-x' were given. > Adds a `-R ruserlist' option, which is the same as what > SYSv3 describes for `-u' (we already have a `-u'). > Amazingly, none of solaris, linux, or irix seem to > have any kind of `-R' option. SUSv3 says -u selects by effective uid and -U selects by real uid. FreeBSD -U selects by effective uid and -u is something else totally. This is only of the (few) obstacles to SUSv3 (not XSI) compatibility (another being the default selection). XSI level compatibility would require a lot of POLA violation. > [snip] > Fixes interactions between all these "selector options", > & our `-x' option (which is not mentioned in SUSv3). > For the selector options, I tried to meet the > description of: "If any are specified, the default > list shall be ignored and ps shall select the > processes represented by the inclusive OR of all > the selection-criteria options." Hmm, this means the user must add `-x' if `-U', `-s', etc. are used and he wants to see all matching processes. That's not good for writing scripts that should work on both Solaris and FreeBSD, for example. Also, `-U' used to imply `-x' on FreeBSD (it does not on NetBSD). I propose making it so that `-x' is implied when any selector except `-a' is used. > [snip] Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040322155901.GA17891>