Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Carsten Mattner via arch-general
FWIW and thankfully, we're not all wired the same, and I can say with certainty that I find htop irritating and confusing, having used FreeBSD and procps top for decades. There is a learning curve, I guess, or we're using/missing different features. But to return to the important point, does anyon

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
On 04/11/2018 04:36 PM, Leonid Isaev via arch-general wrote: > It should also be mentioned that ~/.toprc is the most hideous config file on > my > system :) And FWIW, I don't think that upstream wanted to provoke any learning > -- they just made a change for the sake of it (probably following GNOM

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
On 04/11/2018 04:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: > It's ironic the configuration allowing the choice between the new/old > interfaces isn't described clearly, or at all, in 'man top'. The Alternate > Display 'A', has nothing whatsoever to do with whether modern top is display. > From my read of the m

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Leonid Isaev via arch-general
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 03:20:10PM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote: > On 04/11/2018 12:08 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > > It's ironic, I guess, that the procps-ng developers did this in order to > > provoke people into learning how to configure top, but now we have > > people preferring t

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread David C. Rankin
On 04/11/2018 12:08 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > It's ironic, I guess, that the procps-ng developers did this in order to > provoke people into learning how to configure top, but now we have > people preferring the old look, who complain when the default changes, > and then when we re

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
If I actually used top after discovering htop, I would prefer the old look (which our new procps-ng maintainer has apparently made an executive decision to use). On 04/11/2018 12:53 PM, David C. Rankin wrote: > The PKGBUILD change for rebuilds is simple, but we ought to have one or the > other (mo

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread Carsten Mattner via arch-general
I haven't seen the modern top ui, but it sounds useful and I'd be in favor of it if it doesn't break things. But I have to note that terminal emulators and coloring curses applications is very hard to do in a way that works across everyone's favorite color scheme. It's bound to result in invisible

Re: [arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-11 Thread David C. Rankin
On 04/10/2018 07:05 PM, Jonathon Fernyhough wrote: > Much as I'm wary about raising this after last time... here goes. Really > just putting this out there as a thing to consider if it's not already > known about. > > With 3.3.13, upstream introduced support for a system-wide default > toprc, /etc

[arch-general] procps-ng 3.3.13 and its new topdefaultrc

2018-04-10 Thread Jonathon Fernyhough
Much as I'm wary about raising this after last time... here goes. Really just putting this out there as a thing to consider if it's not already known about. With 3.3.13, upstream introduced support for a system-wide default toprc, /etc/topdefaultrc [1]. This is their "recommended" way of setting s