[9fans] ps bug

[9fans] ps bug

[Bruce Ellis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 95 bytes --]

using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc fun I
guess.

brucee

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 166 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Sergey Zhilkin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 452 bytes --]

Seems ps (shell script from hell) uses plan9port sort. And coreutils sort
do not undarstand +1 parameter.

Try to place plan9port path before any other.

2017-04-11 9:54 GMT+03:00 Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>:

> using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc fun
> I guess.
>
> brucee
>
>


-- 
С наилучшими пожеланиями
Жилкин Сергей
With best regards
Zhilkin Sergey

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 928 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Sergey Zhilkin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 762 bytes --]

Also, on Linux (OpenSUSE 42.2) i have same output of p9p ps -e and ps ax in
line count

2017-04-11 10:21 GMT+03:00 Sergey Zhilkin <szhilkin@gmail.com>:

> Seems ps (shell script from hell) uses plan9port sort. And coreutils sort
> do not undarstand +1 parameter.
>
> Try to place plan9port path before any other.
>
> 2017-04-11 9:54 GMT+03:00 Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>:
>
>> using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc fun
>> I guess.
>>
>> brucee
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> С наилучшими пожеланиями
> Жилкин Сергей
> With best regards
> Zhilkin Sergey
>



-- 
С наилучшими пожеланиями
Жилкин Сергей
With best regards
Zhilkin Sergey

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1698 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Bruce Ellis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 583 bytes --]

Doesn't help.

brucee

On 11 April 2017 at 17:21, Sergey Zhilkin <szhilkin@gmail.com> wrote:

> Seems ps (shell script from hell) uses plan9port sort. And coreutils sort
> do not undarstand +1 parameter.
>
> Try to place plan9port path before any other.
>
> 2017-04-11 9:54 GMT+03:00 Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>:
>
>> using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc fun
>> I guess.
>>
>> brucee
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> С наилучшими пожеланиями
> Жилкин Сергей
> With best regards
> Zhilkin Sergey
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1444 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Sergey Zhilkin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 939 bytes --]

Hmm checked twice

zhilkin@szhilkin:~/Work/Mem> ps ax | wc -l
    350
szhilkin@szhilkin:~/Work/Mem> 9 ps -e | wc -l
    350


2017-04-11 10:51 GMT+03:00 Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>:

> Doesn't help.
>
> brucee
>
> On 11 April 2017 at 17:21, Sergey Zhilkin <szhilkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Seems ps (shell script from hell) uses plan9port sort. And coreutils sort
>> do not undarstand +1 parameter.
>>
>> Try to place plan9port path before any other.
>>
>> 2017-04-11 9:54 GMT+03:00 Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> using plan9ports' "ps -e" does not print all processes. dirread /proc
>>> fun I guess.
>>>
>>> brucee
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> С наилучшими пожеланиями
>> Жилкин Сергей
>> With best regards
>> Zhilkin Sergey
>>
>
>


-- 
С наилучшими пожеланиями
Жилкин Сергей
With best regards
Zhilkin Sergey

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2327 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Mat Kovach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 807 bytes --]

>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: 1729 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Prof Brucee]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1174 bytes --]

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: 2031 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Winston Kodogo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1548 bytes --]

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: 2952 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] ps bug

[Prof Brucee]

[-- 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 --]