Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/08/06/17:30:47
On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 09:07:52PM +0100, Jim George wrote:
>On Tue, 6 Aug 2002 10:23:54 -0400
>Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
>>On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 11:26:23AM +0100, Jim George wrote:
>>>should ps be modified to work as top does, of course /proc would need
>>>to be upgraded, or can top be modified to work as ps does, or should
>>>both continue on their own but be updated to recognise all processes
>>>running on a box?
>>
>>'ps --help' will show you an option for displaying windows processes as
>>well as cygwin processes.
>>
>I'm aware that ps -W shows both but what I was driving at in my own
>befuddled way is, shouldn't both top and ps be capable of reporting on
>both, i.e bring top in to line with ps?
I don't know what you're asking for. Chris January has indicated
willingness to do this. Maybe you missed that. It still needs someone
to do the work.
>Based on what Corrina said this would mean a major change to one or
>other of the utilities since top uses /proc but ps uses the cygwin api.
>Hence which, if any, should change?
What do you want ps to do? Lose the ability to use -W and make it
unable to process Windows files? Doesn't seem very worthwhile to me.
FWIW, top isn't even an official cygwin package yet. I think you're
getting a little ahead of yourself.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -