On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 08:48 -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote: > Jonathan McKeown wrote: > > On Tuesday 25 August 2009 15:44:47 Ed Schouten wrote: > >> * Brian Somers <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> I recently closed bin/137647 and had second thoughts after Ivan (the > >>> originator) challenged my reason for closing it. > >>> > >>> The suggestion is that ps's -w switch is a strange artifact that can > >>> be safely deprecated. ps goes to great lengths to implement width > >>> limitations, and any time I've seen people not using -ww has either > >>> been a mistake or doesn't matter. > > The difference between "ps", "ps -w", and "ps -ww" is pretty > significant for Java, in particular. Java command lines > are typically enormous (thank you, CLASSPATH) which makes > "ps -ww" often more annoying than it's worth. > > I concur with another poster that the GNU ps approach for > supporting multiple argument styles deserves consideration.
I realized that nobody asked me, but IMHO it ain't broke so don't fix it. I use -w and -ww a lot, and yes, I do distinguish them. Sometimes -w is enough; if it isn't, then I'll use -ww but otherwise I avoid it because it gives just too much output in many cases. -- Frank Mayhar [email protected] http://www.exit.com/ http://www.exit.com/blog/frank/ http://www.zazzle.com/fmayhar* _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
