From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4287 invoked by alias); 17 May 2016 11:53:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 38508 Received: (qmail 9285 invoked from network); 17 May 2016 11:53:27 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:to:from:subject:organization:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rPx5l0/BCptv1Oo4r8+muzrpAcYexAb5bSGq4/yknvM=; b=T5PSkCtfGi/qUIe+HhDymt4czxZI2tvzviE6tQ9kZFUdEtucF+wxkTG4KEUiVAUiQY rw+psdoNV3qs8L/ndTGSngbmSRpQCGgVqrdNM9/B27D2/CuX7iZoXFNQ/aE1lSpBXOwq SSLxQkY/ug3uQQhLlHjjc4BDMSq8pvwUrO2qKlN23G+6AlX0WUI8yGdRwTqnOz2XMA4E HNM6rE8MiKRvFTBT4h5T97ZKKozY3bKzLpXsd6MfrxqcxJmUcdELG3a5s1RbDsK5b2Jv iU1zTpB0KssNbR58Sd6FO0vS7+fQRbE39Fro5er+cMPCScwwXyY7csMBwYKrl+/stkXS e3jQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWPqdyNNYRCaIiSjOmPE215Ah4+ZMeuxHIMieV+pd7Txifdg69mO0agFU71JJxeMXca X-Received: by 10.28.113.67 with SMTP id m64mr24119904wmc.58.1463482223695; Tue, 17 May 2016 03:50:23 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: Marko Myllynen To: zsh workers From: Marko Myllynen Subject: zsh pid completion Organization: Red Hat Message-ID: <573AF76D.2010106@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 13:50:21 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I see that _pids completion offers only a very limited subset of the running pids (even by the same user). For example, if I launch a command on a terminal its PID is not included in completion alternatives on another terminal. Also, when root, in some cases it might be beneficial to offer also non-root PIDs (perhaps this could be configurable). Is there some reason for this limited approach? (I'm not sending any patches yet, I'm afraid with ps(1) portability might be a bit tricky.) Thanks, -- Marko Myllynen