At 11:50 AM +0300 4/19/10, Eitan Adler wrote:
This has been waiting as a pr for a while - any update if this will be
committed?
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/143558
Oops. I think I'm supposed to be looking into that...
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = dros...@r
This has been waiting as a pr for a while - any update if this will be
committed?
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/143558
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Content-ID:
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:01, jhell@ wrote:
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:01, eitanadlerlist@ wrote:
This patch hijacks pgrep's -l
[cut]
This particular section of the patch should probably be left out until its
worked over in a way that it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 07:10, lars.engels@ wrote:
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Eitan Adler wrote:
This patch hijacks pgrep's -l
I'd like to paint the bikeshed with little -p's ;-)
If it is a bikeshed then maybe we should make it '-b
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:01, eitanadlerlist@ wrote:
This patch hijacks pgrep's -l
[cut]
This particular section of the patch should probably be left out until its
worked over in a way that it does not print the info message if a process
has been found and killed already.
if (!didAction && !p
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 12:01:26PM +0200, Eitan Adler wrote:
> This patch hijacks pgrep's -l
>
I'd like to paint the bikeshed with little -p's ;-)
pgpnxCW9VgVDg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
This patch hijacks pgrep's -l
Index: pkill.1
===
--- pkill.1 (revision 203347)
+++ pkill.1 (working copy)
@@ -168,9 +168,9 @@
If used in conjunction with
.Fl f ,
print the process ID and the full argument list for each matc
jhell DataIX.net> writes:
[snip]
>
> Now pkill -v sleep on my system actually causes my Xserver to exit with a
> unexpected signal 15.
Yes. "pkill -v sleep" kills all your own processes except for sleep. As root,
it kills all processes running on your machine except for sleep.
-V is not a go
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 16:17, eitanadlerlist@ wrote:
Yeah - I wasn't sure what else to use.
Does the -V work as intended? Is this a worthwhile patch?
IMHO the biggest problem with unix system commands is the lack of constancy
of the flags.
Personally I would like to see pkill have this option as
Yeah - I wasn't sure what else to use.
Does the -V work as intended? Is this a worthwhile patch?
IMHO the biggest problem with unix system commands is the lack of constancy
of the flags.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:58 PM, jhell wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:52, jhell@ wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, 3 F
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 12:52, jhell@ wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:00, eitanadlerlist@ wrote:
I added an option to pkill which lists what processes it kills and what
signal is sent. If no signals are sent it prints out the same message
killall does.
Unfortunately that patch works but has uninten
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:00, eitanadlerlist@ wrote:
I added an option to pkill which lists what processes it kills and what
signal is sent. If no signals are sent it prints out the same message
killall does.
Unfortunately that patch works but has unintended operation that can be
seen with the f
I added an option to pkill which lists what processes it kills and what
signal is sent. If no signals are sent it prints out the same message
killall does.
pkill-verbose-option.patch
Description: Binary data
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
13 matches
Mail list logo
