From: andrewc@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Andrew J. Cosgriff !) Subject: Re: [FIX] PS FIX FOR 99p2 !!! Date: 11 Jan 1993 08:51:12 GMT
rcopg@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU (Paul Gortmaker) writes:
> Okay, it seems that the /proc based ps is the way to go. But what about
>stuff like "top". Is it in the works for a /proc based version ??? Or will it
>be okay with the previously posted patch? (Which BTW, I haven't tried yet...
>I'll brave it this afternoon.)
No, that's why (among other reasons) it's in the BETA / ALPHA directory (depends
where you go) at the FTP sites...Sure, if I knew enough about ps/top/proc-fs
I'd do it myself, but, well, i don't...Perhaps it's time to learn...
> Just out of curiousity, are there any drawbacks to using the /proc
>based stuff???
You'll probably get very confused trying to look at the /proc/self dir. :)
As you said, top, w, etc. aren't done yet, but hang in there I'd expect...
Enjoy !
Cos !
-- =============================================================================== * Andrew J. Cosgriff ! * #include <std_witty_quote.h> #define HERE cc.monash.edu.au #include <std_disclaimer.h> Hassle me at : andrewc@aurora.HERE ; andrewc@lindblat.HERE ; cos@yoyo.HERE