X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 14:11:23 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: ps -ef difference linux/cygwin (arguments)
Message-ID: <20090501181122.GD11295@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20090429081129 DOT GA44103 AT xs4all DOT nl> <20090429144728 DOT GB12904 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 1 DOT 00 DOT 0904291050430 DOT 14823 AT pilot DOT trilug DOT org> <20090429150130 DOT GC12904 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 1 DOT 00 DOT 0904291105090 DOT 14823 AT pilot DOT trilug DOT org> <f60fe000904290831i4f1a7a0cl9abd875e6c7fb270 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20090501145221 DOT GA6507 AT amd64 DOT of DOT nowhere>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090501145221.GA6507@amd64.of.nowhere>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 04:52:21PM +0200, jurriaan AT rivierenland DOT xs4all DOT nl wrote:
>From: Mark J. Reed <markjreed AT gmail DOT com>
>Date: Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:31:13AM -0400
>>This has come up before; an archive search might save some repetition.
>
>Yes, sorry about that.  I can understand that the output of ps is used
>in scripts.  I find it harder to understand that adding a new flag to
>ps would also break those scripts,

You're assuming a fact not in evidence.

>but what I'd love most and suspect would keep this question from
>popping up and getting everybody excited now and again would be a small
>line in the ps man page.

Well, the current "excitement" was apparently because I provided a one
line direct response to a question rather than assuming that what was
actually being asked for was a history lesson and a reminder that
patches are thoughtfuly considered.  Little did I know that there was an
indignant person out there who was capable of speaking for lots of
Cygwin users who languished in ignorance on this subject.

Languishing aside, however, if someone is willing to provide a patch to
provide a new option and new functionality, it will be given the same
attention that we always give to patches.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/