Re: [ITA] procps-ng-3.3.15

2019-03-15 Thread Achim Gratz
Takashi Yano writes: > I have just tested a bit. One question: Why are the tty names > of consoles other than own one shown as dev/cons* instead of > just cons*? The console device are local to each process, so for foreign console devices there is an extra code path (taht wasn#t exercised in the c

Re: [ITA] procps-ng-3.3.15

2019-03-14 Thread Takashi Yano
Hi Achim, On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 21:18:01 +0100 Achim Gratz wrote: > Since the current maintainer seems to have gone missing I intend to take > over. Test release: > Please test running in Windows console and check if all processes that > have a controlling terminal are listed correctly with "p

[ITA] procps-ng-3.3.15

2019-03-14 Thread Achim Gratz
Since the current maintainer seems to have gone missing I intend to take over. Test release: --8<---cut here---start->8--- root=http://cygwin.stromeko.net/ repo=$root/maint/$arch/release/procps-ng $repo/libprocps-devel/libprocps-devel-3.3.15-0.hint $repo/lib

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 16 10:33, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Mar 16 00:14, Wayne Porter wrote: > > > > On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz wrote: > > >Wayne Porter writes: > > >> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with > > >> the community. > > > > > >That's actually pro

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Mar 16 00:14, Wayne Porter wrote: > > On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz wrote: > >Wayne Porter writes: > >> I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with > >> the community. > > > >That's actually procps-ng or is it not? If so, it seems the current > >vers

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 16/03/2016 08:42, Wayne Porter wrote: Ok, good to know. I was working on this as an exercise in porting code and saw that the current version was quite old. Should I email the current maintainer directly instead of putting it out on the mailing list? Hi Wayne, please note #1 never send

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Wayne Porter
Ok, good to know. I was working on this as an exercise in porting code and saw that the current version was quite old. Should I email the current maintainer directly instead of putting it out on the mailing list? On March 16, 2016 12:35:06 AM PDT, Marco Atzeri wrote: >On 16/03/2016 08:14, Wayn

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Marco Atzeri
On 16/03/2016 08:14, Wayne Porter wrote: I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution page that for it to be considered for the repo

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-16 Thread Wayne Porter
I'm new to this community so I wasn't sure if I went about this the proper way. 3.3.11 is the latest but is not listed as stable in the debian package list. I was going by the guidelines on the contribution page that for it to be considered for the repos that it has to be. On March 15, 2016 11

Re: [ITA] procps

2016-03-15 Thread Achim Gratz
Wayne Porter writes: > I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with > the community. That's actually procps-ng or is it not? If so, it seems the current version is 3.3.11 from looking at my Linux box. Also, the current procps maintainer is quite active on the Cygwin ml,

[ITA] procps

2016-03-15 Thread Wayne Porter
I have just finished porting procps 3.3.9 and wanted to share it with the community. procps-3.3.9-1.tar.xz https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6jD_6qfO1gMeEFVdUFyY0hqc0k/view?usp=sharing procps-3.3.9-1-src.tar.xz https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6jD_6qfO1gMZW5yU0ZnSVR6ZVk/view?usp=sharing procps-