Glenn, I think plgrep would be a better choice. The problem originates from Solaris, which once had the proc utilities in a separate directory called /usr/proc/bin, i.e. pgrep was in /usr/proc/bin/pgrep. But in later incarnations Sun management decided to copy the Linux solution of 'dump all bins in /usr/bin', including the proc tools, and so they were moved from /usr/proc/bin to /usr/bin. Linux followed suit soon. So the once clean Unix name space system via PATH was broken and corrupted.
Olga On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 15:42:51 +0100 Michal Hlavinka wrote: >> I noticed ksh has (new) pgrep builtin, but it's not drop-in replacement >> for original pgrep. These options seem to be missing: > >> -u, --euid euid,... >> Only match processes whose effective user ID is listed. Either the >> numerical or symbolical value may be used. > >> -U, --uid uid,... >> Only match processes whose real user ID is listed. Either the >> numerical or symbolical value may be used. > > thanks for noticing this > the ast pgrep means "grep using perl REs" requested on the list a while back > I now recall the solaris pgrep which is "look processes based on name and > other attributes" > this process flavor is also in linux so I will change the conflicting ast > pgrep to plgrep > for the next alpha > I'm not a fan of overpopulating the grep namespace and would just as soon > drop plgrep for "grep --perl" which has always worked > > _______________________________________________ > ast-developers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ [email protected] \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'` /\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\ `--` `--` _______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
