Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Prof Brucee <prof.brucee@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1767 bytes --]

It's taken nearly 3 days for Ubuntu to upgrade (vmware) with kswapd using
more than 100 mins of CPU.

8 3.8GHz procs. Deeply wrong.

brucee

On 12/04/2017 1:32 PM, "Winston Kodogo" <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:

There is something deeply wrong with many things. Just ask jwz:

https://www.jwz.org/blog/2017/04/would-you-like-to-
supersize-that-for-a-dollar-extra/

But at least ed is still the standard editor. Such is progress.

On 12 April 2017 at 15:16, Prof Brucee <prof.brucee@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ubuntu doesn't return all processes for "ps -e" so I guess there's
> something deeply wrong with /proc.
>
> brucee
>
> On 12/04/2017 12:56 AM, "Mat Kovach" <mek@well.com> wrote:
>
> From the man page:
>
> =$ man ps
>
>      PS(1)                                                       PS(1)
>
>      NAME
>           ps, psu - process status
>
>      SYNOPSIS
>           ps [ -pa ]
>
>           psu [ -pa ] [ user ]
>
>  [snip]
>           With the -p flag, ps also prints, after the system time, the
>           baseline and current priorities of each process.
>
>           The -a flag causes ps to print the arguments for the pro-
>           cess.  Newlines in arguments will be translated to spaces
>           for display.
>
> plan9port's ps does not have a '-e' option, if given it is ignore.
>
> Checking the script, ps uses the os version of ps  and the arguments -axww
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Bruce Ellis" <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
> *To: *"Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, April 11, 2017 2:54:07 AM
> *Subject: *[9fans] ps bug
>
> using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc fun
> I guess.
> brucee
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3726 bytes --]