From: parry@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Tom J Parry) Subject: Re: ps that uses /proc Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 10:45:51 GMT
Andrew J. Cosgriff ! (andrewc@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au) wrote:
>parry@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Tom J Parry) writes:
>>You need to recompile ps and friends for 0.99. Before I did this ps showed
>>a total of 0 processes (but didn't give an error). Lack of recompilation
>>of ps and friends probably explains their sick state with 0.98 pl6.
>ps -U
>ought to do (assuming you have a /usr/src/linux/tools/system file)
Oh, I forgot that. (To say that I did "ps U" about 20 times: the number of
times I recompiled while testing different versions of tcp).
>although I did notice in 98p6 that ps no longer shows the command line
>options of the processes - they're all inside brackets...
== sick state (IMHO). The options are not shown in brackets, the name of the
executable is, since this is stored in the process table, while the command
line parameters are stored in the programs memory space. ps seems to think that
the program is swapped out.
>Any fixes ?
Perhaps recompiling ps would do the trick? (seriously).
(smilies deleted for ideological reasons)
-- Tom J Parry. Your reality is a figment of my imagination.