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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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-
11 matches
Mail list logo