NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/comp/os/linux/25805

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 1.3 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!crdgw1!rpi!gatech!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!pipex!demon!holmes.demon.co.uk!loz
From: [e-mail] (Laurence Culhane)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: kmem ps is nicer
Keywords: ps,proc,kmem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 27 Jan 93 23:38:08 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Disorganised linuxer
Lines: 23

I've seen some people say how the /proc based 'ps' is the one to use, and
that users of Branko's kmem based ps should move to the proc based.

Well.  I use both.  I rely on the proc based while hacking and upgrading
kernels, but I'd be lost without a reliable kmem ps (etc).  Lots of the
code I use writes into a process's argv space so that it can convey
more information to the user via 'ps'.  For instance, sendmail can tell
you an awful lot about what is going on if you have a kmem based ps.

I for one hope that we *always* have the choice.  I want both available
and would hope that Branko will keep upgrading the kmem code for major
releases.   Obviously it's not so vital that minor hacks are made for
interim kernel patches.  BUT  having a kmem based ps available for all
major number kernel releases would be great.

Comments?  Mail them.  Don't post.



--
Laurence Culhane
Internet: [e-mail]
Voice: [phone]