From: Peter MacDonald (pmacdona@sanjuan)
Date: 01/28/93


From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
Subject: Re: SLS xmkmf and 0.99pl4 top/w problem
Date: 29 Jan 1993 05:26:59 GMT

In article <michaelw.728181095@mcshh.hanse.de> michaelw@mcshh.Hanse.DE (Michael Will) writes:
>jsteele@netcom.com (John Steele) writes:
>
>>There may be a problem with the current version of SLS with xmkmf.
>>Attempting to execute gives '/lib/cpp does not exist' and refuses to
>>continue. There is no /lib/cpp, is this a version of gcc problem?
>No, it is just, that you have to make a symlink to your cpp, which is
>elswhere... SLS has got lot`s of these inconsistencies lately I am afraid...

Lots? A new version of sysperms.tpz was put up 10 days ago that fixed
this as well as a number of other problems, including the not mounting
the procps fs problem below.

I can understand people reporting problems a few days after their fixed,
but if they insist on ignoring upgrades and additions weeks after the
fact, ...

The big mistake they seem to make, is thinking SLS is a static package.
So they download it one week, install it the next, and report the bugs
the following week. In this scenario, week one is always the week
that a major upgrade occurred :-) Murphys Law.

Nonetheless, I am seriously amazed at its usage. During the 99p4 upgrade
I had to delete the a1 disk for 2 hours. I received no less than 7 mail
messages telling me it was gone. And my email address is notoriously
hard to find (read: missing from this header, and I like it that way :-).

>
>>Everything appears to be working fine, with exception to 'w':
>Yes, the problem seems to be, that the ps is a proc-filesystem based one,
>and thus does not have an ps -U option to update the database the normal
>ps and who and top need to work.
>
>For top I know of no cure, but "ps -u" does the same as "w" did.
>
>Greetings, michael Will from HH92