RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f
Dave Korn sent the following at Friday, January 22, 2010 6:38 PM >On 22/01/2010 21:28, Don Beusee wrote: >>> People don't care about implementation details. They care about what >> is running on the system (the WHOLE system). > > You are speaking for yourself. Not "everyone in the world". (Larry, please excuse me for continuing.) Don, Let me second that motion. I, for one, do not want the default to be seeing everything on the machine. Do you how many processes that can be? Right now, here's what I get eliminating ps and wc. - ps gives 2 processes. - ps -W gives 27. - Windows Task Manger gives 67. I definitely don't was ps -W as the default. I'd rather not have to adjust scripts or even create an alias for ps. When I want to kill a Windows process, I use Windows tools. When I want to kill a Cygwin process, I use Cygwin tools. Sometimes that doesn't work so I use a Windows tool (Task Manager) to kill a Cygwin process. You are on Windows even though you want to be on Linux. Most everyone on this list can understand what that is like. But the fact of the matter is that you are on a Windows machine. It is impossible to make Windows go away. It is impossible to make Windows behave exactly like Linux. I respectfully suggest that it will be to your advantage to try to learn to live with Windows. Or at least to adjust your expectations of Cygwin. Another point. The Cygwin developers have been using Cygwin for years and years. They also use Linux. Indeed, they include a current and a former employee of Redhat. Trust them. If they tolerate a difference between Cygwin and POSIX or Linux, there is - a good reason for it or - under the circumstances it is better that way or - they just haven't gotten around to working on it. Good luck, - Barry Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On 01/22/2010 06:15 PM, Don Beusee wrote: I am a unix user that has moved to windows. I want unix commands on windows that function like their unix counterparts. That is supposed to be one of cygwin's missions, is it not? Isn't that one of the main reasons people get cygwin? What's the point of providing these commands otherwise? Why the apparent objection to offering the options to the CYGWIN (or some other) environment variable where users can control the behavior of these commands globally on their system? If you won't change the default behavior because of your religious beliefs, fine, but can you at least allow us to change the default behavior on our systems that does not involve changing scripts or typing habits? Please? You've been given alternatives that don't require making code changes to Cygwin or any changes in your scripts or typing habits. And you've been ignoring all the very valid arguments against making changes that you suggest. I think it's fair to say that if you're not going to do your homework and process the responses you're getting, then there is no further value to this thread for the rest of us on this list. Please, let's just stop it here. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On 1/22/2010 4:15 PM, Don Beusee wrote: I am a unix user that has moved to windows. I want unix commands on windows that function like their unix counterparts. That is supposed to be one of cygwin's missions, is it not? Sorry, but you're not exactly on the side of the angels when you argue that ps should work "like on Unix". ps is one of the few programs that still works quite differently on every *ix. You can say you want it to work like the ps some particular *ix, but then you have to explain how you want it to work around the problems that cause it to work the way it does now. (One being, Windows PIDs are not Cygwin PIDs.) A raw demand to "make it work the way I think it should work" isn't going to get you very far. It works the way it does for a reason, and if you want it to work another way, you have to propose a way to get from here to there. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On 22/01/2010 21:28, Don Beusee wrote: > People don't care about implementation details. They care about what is > running on the system (the WHOLE system). You are speaking for yourself. Not "everyone in the world". Try not to forget that. cheers, DaveK -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f
I am a unix user that has moved to windows. I want unix commands on windows that function like their unix counterparts. That is supposed to be one of cygwin's missions, is it not? Isn't that one of the main reasons people get cygwin? What's the point of providing these commands otherwise? Why the apparent objection to offering the options to the CYGWIN (or some other) environment variable where users can control the behavior of these commands globally on their system? If you won't change the default behavior because of your religious beliefs, fine, but can you at least allow us to change the default behavior on our systems that does not involve changing scripts or typing habits? Please? -Don -Original Message- From: Marco Atzeri [mailto:marco_atz...@yahoo.it] Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 2:03 PM To: cygwin@cygwin.com; d...@beusee.com Subject: RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f --- Ven 22/1/10, Don Beusee ha scritto: > People don't care about > implementation details. They care about what is > running on the system (the WHOLE system). They want > kill and ps to show what's running on the system, not what > cygwin "thinks" is running. then you are in the wrong place try here http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb795533.aspx pslist and pskill are for any "windows" program > > -Don > Marco -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 01:28:05PM -0800, Don Beusee wrote: >People don't care about implementation details. They care about what >is running on the system (the WHOLE system). They want kill and ps to >show what's running on the system, not what cygwin "thinks" is running. >Since exec() creates a new process on windows, that's more relevant for >these tools. You're missing the point. kill DOESN'T WORK with windows process unless you want to summarily terminate a process. The built-in kill in the shells that are in the distribution won't work with pure Windows process at all. >How about let the user control how this works without having to change >scripts or typing habits? Can you add a new option via the CYGWIN >environment variable, something like [no]allprocs which kill and ps can >look at instead of -f and -W options (although you can keep those for >compatibility with existing cygwin releases)? Of course, I think the >default behavior should be allprocs, since I believe almost all users >will prefer this behavior. Sorry but it doesn't work this way. You don't go to a mailing list, argue for a feature and then, when people disagree and try to explain, suggest that those people should implement something for you. It's a free software project. If you think this is a good idea then show us the code. If you don't have the skills to make the necessary modifications then you'll just have to live with the current implementation because, I can assure you, that I don't agree with your point of view and I, as the author of most of the process code, will not be making any changes to it to accommodate your wishes. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > adding a system-wide flag to the CYGWIN environment variable is a > 10 ton sledge hammer for the pin you're trying to drive home. Yep. Especially as adding this: alias ps='ps -W' to ~/.bashrc will DTRT. -- Chuck -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f
--- Ven 22/1/10, Don Beusee ha scritto: > People don't care about > implementation details. They care about what is > running on the system (the WHOLE system). They want > kill and ps to show what's running on the system, not what > cygwin "thinks" is running. then you are in the wrong place try here http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb795533.aspx pslist and pskill are for any "windows" program > > -Don > Marco -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On 01/22/2010 04:28 PM, Don Beusee wrote: People don't care about implementation details. They care about what is running on the system (the WHOLE system). They want kill and ps to show what's running on the system, not what cygwin "thinks" is running. Since exec() creates a new process on windows, that's more relevant for these tools. You have to admit, ps -ef showing only a few processes out of a houndred is a serious handicap for these tools and any scripts trying to maintain compatibility across windows and unix/linux. Also, the man page for -e (on unix/linux) says that -e means "every process on the system". It will be more useful to show all windows processes, or if you want to be smart about it, all windows processes minus all the ones cygwin knows are the result of exec(). However, I think the exec() distinction doesn't really matter (certainly not to most people), since, how often will you really see it and how often will it really matter? I don't see what's the big deal to allow ps and kill to see all windows processes by default. How about let the user control how this works without having to change scripts or typing habits? Can you add a new option via the CYGWIN environment variable, something like [no]allprocs which kill and ps can look at instead of -f and -W options (although you can keep those for compatibility with existing cygwin releases)? Of course, I think the default behavior should be allprocs, since I believe almost all users will prefer this behavior. You've been given allot of good reasons for why Cygwin's 'ps' works as it does. While there may be some minimal benefit to users to not have to type the extra flag to get Windows processes listed, if that's what they want, adding a system-wide flag to the CYGWIN environment variable is a 10 ton sledge hammer for the pin you're trying to drive home. I don't see the point to arguing for this change to Cygwin if you're not going to get consistency everywhere though. Perhaps you should consider that aspect and redirect your efforts upstream if you feel this issue warrants more discussion (and hasn't already been hashed and rehashed there). In any case, as others have pointed out already, in the meantime, you're "stuck" with the current options - either alias or script your way out of this problem or create a patched version for yourself. -- Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office 216 Dalton Rd. (508) 893-9889 - FAX Holliston, MA 01746 _ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f
People don't care about implementation details. They care about what is running on the system (the WHOLE system). They want kill and ps to show what's running on the system, not what cygwin "thinks" is running. Since exec() creates a new process on windows, that's more relevant for these tools. You have to admit, ps -ef showing only a few processes out of a houndred is a serious handicap for these tools and any scripts trying to maintain compatibility across windows and unix/linux. Also, the man page for -e (on unix/linux) says that -e means "every process on the system". It will be more useful to show all windows processes, or if you want to be smart about it, all windows processes minus all the ones cygwin knows are the result of exec(). However, I think the exec() distinction doesn't really matter (certainly not to most people), since, how often will you really see it and how often will it really matter? I don't see what's the big deal to allow ps and kill to see all windows processes by default. How about let the user control how this works without having to change scripts or typing habits? Can you add a new option via the CYGWIN environment variable, something like [no]allprocs which kill and ps can look at instead of -f and -W options (although you can keep those for compatibility with existing cygwin releases)? Of course, I think the default behavior should be allprocs, since I believe almost all users will prefer this behavior. -Don -Original Message- From: Andy Koppe [mailto:andy.ko...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 9:02 PM To: d...@beusee.com; cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f 2010/1/22 Don Beusee: > ps -e on Unix displays �every process running on the system�.� This command > doesn't do that under cygwin.� Why should it be necessary to supply -W to > see all processes running on the system? Because those processes are not Cygwin/Unix processes. In particular, they do not have Cygwin process IDs. Cygwin PIDs and Windows PIDs are different concepts (even though they often coincide), and that's because multiple windows processes can be needed to emulate one Cygwin process. For example, when calling exec(), the new program is conceptually executed in the same Cygwin process, but actually a new Windows process has to be created since Windows doesn't allow a process to change executable. Andy -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
Don Beusee wrote: ps -e on Unix displays “every process running on the system”. This command doesn't do that under cygwin. Why should it be necessary to supply -W to see all processes running on the system? This makes it incompatible with Linux/Unix, and such scripts that rely on -e doing this will not work the same on Cygwin. What is the point to not showing all other processes on the system like Linux/Unix does? This is a silly design and causes headaches and frustration for people trying to write scripts that work on cygwin and Linux/Unix. Can this be changed please? FWIW I just alias: ps='ps -W' works fine roger wells -Don -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple -- Roger Wells, P.E. SAIC 221 Third St Newport, RI 02840 401-847-4210 (voice) 401-849-1585 (fax) roger.k.we...@saic.com -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
2010/1/22 Don Beusee: > ps -e on Unix displays “every process running on the system”. This command > doesn't do that under cygwin. Why should it be necessary to supply -W to > see all processes running on the system? Because those processes are not Cygwin/Unix processes. In particular, they do not have Cygwin process IDs. Cygwin PIDs and Windows PIDs are different concepts (even though they often coincide), and that's because multiple windows processes can be needed to emulate one Cygwin process. For example, when calling exec(), the new program is conceptually executed in the same Cygwin process, but actually a new Windows process has to be created since Windows doesn't allow a process to change executable. Andy -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Why require ps -W and kill -f
On 1/21/2010 7:09 PM, Don Beusee wrote: ps -e on Unix displays “every process running on the system”. Not on every *ix. On FreeBSD, if you give -a (the BSD equivalent of -e) as an unprivileged user, you can't see other people's processes, for security reasons. It would be nice if every *ixes worked exactly like every other, but they don't, and never have. Your scripts have to be able to cope. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
RE: Why require ps -W and kill -f
> From: don > To: cygwin > Subject: Why require ps -W and kill -f > Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:09:03 -0800 > > ps -e on Unix displays “every process running on the system”. This command > doesn't do that under cygwin. Why should it be necessary to supply -W to > see all processes running on the system? This makes it incompatible with > Linux/Unix, and such scripts that rely on -e doing this will not work the > same on Cygwin. What is the point to not showing all other processes on the > system like Linux/Unix does? This is a silly design and causes headaches > and frustration for people trying to write scripts that work on cygwin and > Linux/Unix. Can this be changed please? > Hi Don... Actually, the parameters to ps vary significantly from unix flavor to unix flavor. For an example of a script that attempts to use ps on a range of OSs, look at keychain. Thanks, ...Karl _ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390706/direct/01/ -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Why require ps -W and kill -f
ps -e on Unix displays every process running on the system. This command doesn't do that under cygwin. Why should it be necessary to supply -W to see all processes running on the system? This makes it incompatible with Linux/Unix, and such scripts that rely on -e doing this will not work the same on Cygwin. What is the point to not showing all other processes on the system like Linux/Unix does? This is a silly design and causes headaches and frustration for people trying to write scripts that work on cygwin and Linux/Unix. Can this be changed please? -Don -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
