Solaris has something similar in /usr/proc/bin/ptree. One of the things it lets you do is specify _which_ user to use.
Isn't the kvm_*() interface somewhat frowned upon? Is there anything missing from /proc that you need kvm_* for? -- Cheers, Peter. Juli Mallett wrote: > Hej, > > As some of you may have noticed, I've done some poking of ps(1) lately, and > this has brought attention of people who have ideas for things that they > would like to see done to ps(1) :) The most notable request was for a > feature I've missed having in our ps(1) for a while, the ability to get a > tree of processes printed so you can tell who is whose child, etc. > > ps(1)'s internals, however, didn't seem quite right to me, but after about > 10 minutes reading kvm(3) manpages and recalling some tricks with recursive > programming to produce an N-level tree with as many as N-1 elements, I had > come up with a simple utility to print out a "process tree". > > You can find the code here: > http://people.freebsd.org/~jmallett/.proctree/proctree.c > > And some example output from a cluster machine here: > http://people.freebsd.org/~jmallett/.proctree/proctree.out > > Lots of people have given feedback that they don't care much for the \_ > formatting of the tree, and I'm willing to look at patches that provide > noticably more readable output. > > I'd actually like to hear what information otherwise could better be > included along with associated login, pid, cpu, etc. > > And I'd really like to hear thoughts about inclusion of this into the tree. > Does anyone hold the opinion that it absolutely cannot be included? Does > anyone have any suggestions to make the code better? > > I'm asking you guys, the CURRENT userbase, since you are users who obviously > seem to take more of an interest in FreeBSD's future, etc. :) > > Thanks, > juli. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message