Deprecating ps(1)s -w switch

[Jonathan McKeown]

On Tuesday 25 August 2009 22:51:43 Rick C. Petty wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 04:09:09PM +0200, Jonathan McKeown wrote:
> > I usually want to see ps(1) output in easily-read columns. Without width
> > limits, this can't be guaranteed.
> >
> > I would strongly object to the complete removal of any option to limit
> > the output width of ps(1) and make it easily human-readable.
> >
> > I'm also astonished at the suggestion that not using -ww is ``a
> > mistake''. I very seldom need to see the whole commandline for every
> > process.
>
> Then you must not use Java much.  I almost always need the -ww option.
> I'm fine with the default being "fit into my terminal width", but I'd be
> for one option to specify limited width and another option (-w) to
> specify "as wide as possible".

As it happens, you're right: I don't use Java at all. Neither do I object 
(much) to a change in the default behaviour such that wide output is the norm 
and restricted-width an option.

In the original message, Brian Somers wrote:

> 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.

The suggestion seems to be to remove the width-limiting code altogether, and 
make people who want width-restricted output (for example to keep it in 
columns which are easily scanned by eye) pipe the output through another 
command. That I do object to.