ps enhencements (posix syntax, and more)

[Cyrille Lefevre]

"Garance A Drosihn" <drosih at rpi.edu> wrote:
> At 10:21 AM +0200 4/20/04, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
[snip]
> >
> >A detailled description of what I've made may be found here :
> >
> >     http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/65803
> >
[snip]
> >Of course, I don't expect all of my changes be accepted as-is,
> >however, I hope we will talk about what could be accepted or not,
> >but, please, don't reject all the code for any bad reason and
> >don't be too close.
> 
> Ugh.  There is a lot in your update.  Some of it I like, some of
> it conflicts with other changes I'm already working on, some of it
> I do not like, and some of it I have not figured out what I think
> about it yet.  (I only made a quick look through your PR)

I'm waiting for your comments... :)

> >the next step would have to merge NetBSD/OpenBSD full dynamic
> >sizing of fields (to get rid of our current static sizing of most
> >of the fields) as well as to integrate the NetBSD -k keyword.
> 
> Yeah, I wanted to do more with dynamic sizing, but I have not
> spent any time on it yet.  I have been looking at -k, but I
> wasn't sure how much it would increase the size of `ps'.

I'll tell you when I'll finished (well, I've not starting yet :)
also, I could #if posix sections, so, it will be possible to keep ps
as small as possible for crunching. however, there is also a really
minimal ps implementation in pico.

> I am not sure when I will have time to look at all that you have
> done, but I will look through your changes before doing any more
> major commits to `ps'.

thanks.

Cyrille Lefevre.
-- 
home: mailto:cyrille.lefevre at laposte.net