On Mar 15 17:05, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > - We can keep the code as is, or change that to Linux-compat, whatever
> > you think is the right thing for procps-ng.
>
> Either way is fine for procps-ng, since in both cases there will need to
> be so
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
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> - We can keep the code as is, or change that to Linux-compat, whatever
> you think is the right thing for procps-ng.
Either way is fine for procps-ng, since in both cases there will need to
be some Cygwin specific parts.
> - Whatever you decide, the resul
On Mar 14 21:25, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Achim Gratz writes:
> > That was an exercise in futility. Procps uses system macros to
> > dissemble the major/minor devices, so of course it's doing the right
> > thing on Cygwin while using Cygwin macros (I think these are actuall
rrectly with "procps -elf"
> (i.e. other windows, parents of running programs, etc.).
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*?
$ ./procps -e
PID TTY TIME CMD
590 dev/cons0 00:00:
Achim Gratz writes:
> That was an exercise in futility. Procps uses system macros to
> dissemble the major/minor devices, so of course it's doing the right
> thing on Cygwin while using Cygwin macros (I think these are actually
> inline functions now).
Actually, it didn't
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
lling terminal of the process. (The minor device number is
>> contained in the combination of bits 31 to 20 and 7 to 0; the major
>> device number is in bits 15 to 8.)
>
> Thanks. I changed the output of /proc//stat accordingly, but
> now `procps' always s
On Mar 12 22:55, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2019-03-12 11:03, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > I hope you're still with us.
> > There appears to be a bug in procps-ng:
> > $ procps -e
> > PID TTY TIME CMD
> > 1507 ?00:00:00 tcsh
> >
On 2019-03-12 11:03, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> I hope you're still with us.
> There appears to be a bug in procps-ng:
> $ procps -e
> PID TTY TIME CMD
> 1507 ?00:00:00 tcsh
> 1529 ?00:00:00 cygrunsrv
> 1506 ?00:00:00 mintty
>
Hi Wayne,
I hope you're still with us.
There appears to be a bug in procps-ng:
$ procps -e
PID TTY TIME CMD
1507 ?00:00:00 tcsh
1529 ?00:00:00 cygrunsrv
1506 ?00:00:00 mintty
1531 ?00:00:00 bash
1551 pty0 00:00:00 procps
1488 pty0
atz writes:
> > > It appears that the procps command is missing the manpage, most likely
> > > because Cygwin has its own manpage for ps and got updated more
> > > recently. Can you please arrange for a manpage "procps" to coincide
> > > with the c
Wayne? Ping?
On Jun 15 20:53, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Achim Gratz writes:
> > It appears that the procps command is missing the manpage, most likely
> > because Cygwin has its own manpage for ps and got updated more
> > recently. Can you please arrange for a manpage "pr
Achim Gratz writes:
> It appears that the procps command is missing the manpage, most likely
> because Cygwin has its own manpage for ps and got updated more
> recently. Can you please arrange for a manpage "procps" to coincide
> with the command name so that the two f
It appears that the procps command is missing the manpage, most likely
because Cygwin has its own manpage for ps and got updated more
recently. Can you please arrange for a manpage "procps" to coincide
with the command name so that the two files no longer collide?
Also, it appears th
ories are missing
> >>> in the x86_64 directory. They are present in the i686 directory.
> >>
> >> wget requires that you end the url with a slash in order to download
> >> properly.
> >>
> >> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-
hey are present in the i686 directory.
>>
>> wget requires that you end the url with a slash in order to download
>> properly.
>>
>> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/x86_64/
>> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/i
the url with a slash in order to download properly.
>
> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/x86_64/
> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/i686/
>
> These 2 work, but remove the slash on the end and it will complain
> that libprocps-ng4 is
64 directory. They are present in the i686 directory.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Sutcliffe
wget requires that you end the url with a slash in order to download properly.
wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/x86_64/
wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/i686/
These 2 work, but remove the slash on the end and it will complain
that libprocps-ng4 is not a directory.
--
Wayne Porter
On 22 March 2016 at 10:58, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>
> On 22/03/2016 14:46, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>
>> - On x86_64 the libprocps-ng4 and libprocps-ng-devel packages are missing.
>
> Are you sure ?
>
> $ tar -tf libprocps-ng4/libprocps-ng4-3.3.10-1.tar.xz
> usr/bin/cygprocps-4.dll
> usr/share/man/man
,
Corinna
This seems effective
wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/x86_64
wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/i686
Thank, that worked. Unfortunately there are still two problems:
- On x86_64 the libprocps-ng4 and libprocps-ng-devel packages are missing
t; >Thank you,
> >Corinna
> >
>
>
> This seems effective
>
> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/x86_64
> wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10-1/i686
Thank, that worked. Unfortunately there are still two problems:
- On x86_
On 22/03/2016 10:38, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Can you please, please provide *direct* download links to the files
which allows *easy* reviewing without having to hunt down the files
for review?
Thank you,
Corinna
This seems effective
wget -r -np http://wayneng.x10host.com/procps-ng-3.3.10
On Mar 21 10:59, Wayne Porter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Corinna Vinschen
> wrote:
> > On Mar 21 10:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> - Where's procps? It seems to have gone amiss somehow...
>
> I had a typo in the transform that left it as psco
> >> >>
>> > >> >> Thanks,
>> > >> >> Corinna
>> > >> >> [...]
>> > >>
>> > >> Ok, I have uploaded the files to the location here:
>> > >> http://wayneng.x10host.com/
>> >
t; >> >> [...]
> > >>
> > >> Ok, I have uploaded the files to the location here:
> > >> http://wayneng.x10host.com/
> > >> Going to the url will show a list of all the files and you can wget
> > >> them directly
> > >>
gt; >> http://wayneng.x10host.com/
> >> Going to the url will show a list of all the files and you can wget
> >> them directly
> >> from there. Let me know if you have any issues downloading.
> >
> > Works, but the procps-ng-3.3.9-1-sr
;> them via wget?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Corinna
>> >> [...]
>>
>> Ok, I have uploaded the files to the location here:
>> http://wayneng.x10host.com/
>> Going to the url will show a list of all the files and
> >> [...]
>
> Ok, I have uploaded the files to the location here:
> http://wayneng.x10host.com/
> Going to the url will show a list of all the files and you can wget
> them directly
> from there. Let me know if you have any issues downloading.
Works, but the procps
e Porter wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Since I sent this package incorrectly the first time, I have
>>> >> repackaged it as procps-ng (it's correct name). The current stable
>>> >> build in debian is listed as 3.3.9, so that is
orrectly the first time, I have
>> >> repackaged it as procps-ng (it's correct name). The current stable
>> >> build in debian is listed as 3.3.9, so that is the one that I ported.
>> >> Please let me know if there is anything I'm leaving out or doi
On Mar 18 17:25, Wayne Porter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz
> wrote:
> > On 2016-03-16 15:18, Wayne Porter wrote:
> >>
> >> Since I sent this package incorrectly the first time, I have
> >> repackaged it as procps-ng (it's
On 2016-03-16 15:18, Wayne Porter wrote:
Since I sent this package incorrectly the first time, I have
repackaged it as procps-ng (it's correct name). The current stable
build in debian is listed as 3.3.9, so that is the one that I ported.
Please let me know if there is anything I'm l
Since I sent this package incorrectly the first time, I have
repackaged it as procps-ng (it's correct name). The current stable
build in debian is listed as 3.3.9, so that is the one that I ported.
Please let me know if there is anything I'm leaving out or doing
wrong.
Bin: procps-
On Mar 16, 2016, at 2:18 PM, Wayne Porter wrote:
>
> It contains free, kill, pkill, pgrep, pmap, ps, pwdx, slabtop, sysctl,
> tload, top, uptime, vmstat, w, and watch”
Is the intention for this to replace the current procps package, or to be an
alternative?
If the latter, that
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On 2016-03-16 15:18, Wayne Porter wrote:
>>
>> Since I sent this package incorrectly the first time, I have
>> repackaged it as procps-ng (it's correct name). The current stable
>> build in debian is lis
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
> > &g
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 procp
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
the repos that it has to be.
>>
>
>Usually you can only adopt orphan package.
>In this case procps is not orphan but it has a very active maintainer
>https://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-pkg-maint
>
>
>> On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz
>wrote:
>>> W
ed for the repos that it has to be.
Usually you can only adopt orphan package.
In this case procps is not orphan but it has a very active maintainer
https://www.cygwin.com/cygwin-pkg-maint
On March 15, 2016 11:52:35 PM PDT, Achim Gratz wrote:
Wayne Porter writes:
I have just finished porting pr
h 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
>version is 3.3.11 from looking at my
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 th
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
On Jan 7 16:26, Chris January wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have finally packaged a new version of procps that fixes the
> incorrect page size bug.
>
> http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.7/procps-3.2.7-1-bin.tar.bz2
> http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.7/procps-3.2.7-1-src.
Hello,
I have finally packaged a new version of procps that fixes the
incorrect page size bug.
http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.7/procps-3.2.7-1-bin.tar.bz2
http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.7/procps-3.2.7-1-src.tar.bz2
Cheers,
Chris
On Apr 4 14:17, Chris January wrote:
> http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.6/procps-3.2.6-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.6/procps-3.2.6-1-src.tar.bz2
> http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.6/setup.hint
Uploaded. I removed 010801-2.
Thanks,
Corinna
--
> On Apr 4 13:56, Chris January wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have packaged a new version of procps that fixes the bug that
> > Corinna found in top and also tracks the latest upstream version. I
> > have tweaked setup.hint slightly to have a shorter
On Apr 4 13:56, Chris January wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have packaged a new version of procps that fixes the bug that
> Corinna found in top and also tracks the latest upstream version. I
> have tweaked setup.hint slightly to have a shorter 'long' description.
>
> htt
Hello,
I have packaged a new version of procps that fixes the bug that
Corinna found in top and also tracks the latest upstream version. I
have tweaked setup.hint slightly to have a shorter 'long' description.
http://www.avocado.plus.com/procps-3.2.6/
Cheers,
Chris
On Feb 26 13:11, Chris January wrote:
> > On Feb 21 21:21, Chris January wrote:
> > > I've finally found time to update the procps package. The
> > new version
> > > is based off procps 3.2.5 from procps.sourceforge.net.
> > >
> > > Download
> On Feb 21 21:21, Chris January wrote:
> > I've finally found time to update the procps package. The
> new version
> > is based off procps 3.2.5 from procps.sourceforge.net.
> >
> > Download links:
> > http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5
On Feb 21 21:21, Chris January wrote:
> I've finally found time to update the procps package. The new version is
> based off procps 3.2.5 from procps.sourceforge.net.
>
> Download links:
> http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5-1-bin.tar.bz2
> http://www.atomice.com
I've finally found time to update the procps package. The new version is
based off procps 3.2.5 from procps.sourceforge.net.
Download links:
http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5-1-bin.tar.bz2
http://www.atomice.com/downloads/procps-3.2.5-1-src.tar.bz2
The only Cygwin specific chan
On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 01:09:15AM -, Chris January wrote:
>Ok, I'll bump the version on procps then.
No hurry. No one is complaining, AFAICT.
cgf
hen I built uptime myself it used the /proc/uptime file and worked
> >fine. This would seem to be a build issue in the sh-utils package.
> >Has it been built against a recent version of Cygwin lately? I'm not
> >convinced bumping the procps version number is the right sol
/proc/uptime file and worked
>fine. This would seem to be a build issue in the sh-utils package.
>Has it been built against a recent version of Cygwin lately? I'm not
>convinced bumping the procps version number is the right solution, I
>think it would be better to rebuild sh-ut
#x27;t get boot time: Bad file descriptor
> >
> >The one in procps-010801-2 works for me.
>
> Very strange. I specifically removed uptime.exe in my postinstall process
> but it was definitely there. When I reran the build it disappeared.
>
> I've uploaded a new ver
between the uptime man page from
>procps-010801-2
> o /lib/charset.alias should probably be removed because it's usually
>installed from the gettext-package (As a heads up, there is also a
>charset.alias file in tar-1.13.25-1/texinfo-4.2-4/textutils-2.0.16-1)
I assume that there is
Hi Chris
o This package has now a conflict between kill.exe from cygwin-1.3.18-1
o Additionally nohup is missing also the man page is there and the info
page still mentions the utility as core
o There is now also a conflict between the uptime man page from
procps-010801-2
o /lib
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 11:56:49AM +0100, Volker Zell wrote:
>Hi
>
>There are two versions of uptime in the cygwin distro.
>
>The one from sh-utils-2.0-3 seems to be none functional.
>
>05:23 PM [513]> uptime
>uptime: couldn't get boot time: Bad file descriptor
>
Hi
There are two versions of uptime in the cygwin distro.
The one from sh-utils-2.0-3 seems to be none functional.
05:23 PM [513]> uptime
uptime: couldn't get boot time: Bad file descriptor
The one in procps-010801-2 works for me.
Ciao
Volker
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 10:39:21PM +0100, Chris January wrote:
>The procps packages that were uploaded to sourceware don't seem to be
>showing up in Cygwin Setup. I've verified the packages are actually there on
>sources.redhat.com and they have also shown up on the mirrors. Ho
The procps packages that were uploaded to sourceware don't seem to be
showing up in Cygwin Setup. I've verified the packages are actually there on
sources.redhat.com and they have also shown up on the mirrors. However they
are not available to select in Cygwin Setup and Setup doesn&
Chris January wrote:
>
> > > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2.tar.bz2
> > > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2-src.tar.bz2
> > > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/setup.hint
> >
> > U
> > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2.tar.bz2
> > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2-src.tar.bz2
> > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/setup.hint
>
> Uploaded. Please drop the version field in setup.hi
On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 12:48:19AM +0100, Chris January wrote:
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2.tar.bz2
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-2-src.tar.bz2
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/setup.hint
Uploaded. Please
--- Chris January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I've updated the procps package.
> >
> > -You still have a /usr/bin/kill.exe (which conflicts with cygwin's).
> > It appears to be a copy of your skill.exe. Also the kill.1 and ps.1
> > manpages
--- Chris January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've updated the procps package.
I think this is a really useful package. A couple of things:
-In your README, you leave out the part about applying the
patch in CYGWIN-PATCHES/. 'patch -p1 <' does it for me.
I've updated the procps package. This includes a one-line fix that takes
into account the fact that the major device number of ttys on Cygwin is 5,
as opposed to 4 on Linux. Along with a patch currently in the pipeline for
the Cygwin /proc stuff, this should mean that ps reports the correc
t; (That's the
> > > /proc implementation, not these utiltiies, which should work
> if the /proc
> > > implementation worked).
> > >
> > > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1.tar.bz2
> > >
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/pr
7;t fully work on Windows 95/98/Me. (That's the
> > /proc implementation, not these utiltiies, which should work if the /proc
> > implementation worked).
> >
> > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1.tar.bz2
> > http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/
I just checked out procps that Chris January ported. At least "top",
"uptime" and "watch" work, so you have my vote for including this in Cygwin.
Joe Buehler
e utiltiies, which should work if the /proc
> implementation worked).
>
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1-src.tar.bz2
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/setup.hint
procps reports the "effective user id", not the "real user id" (by design).
The /proc fhandler returns the wrong effective user id (see for yourself by
cat'ing /proc/status, the effective user id is the second number after Uid:).
Therefore the bug is in the /proc fhandler.
Chris
quot; votes.
> >
> > Looks OK to me. Unpacked, man pages/docs OK, didn't have
> > any problems with the quick test of any of the exes...
>
> I just tested procps(1) and there's a pr
ve
> any problems with the quick test of any of the exes...
I just tested procps(1) and there's a problem with the uids:
$ ps -e
PIDPPIDPGID WINPID TTY UIDSTIME COMMAND
1988 11988 1988? 18 Aug 30 /usr/bin/cygrunsrv
21441988198
> From: Corinna Vinschen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Guys,
>
> I'm still missing the "pro" votes.
Looks OK to me. Unpacked, man pages/docs OK, didn't have
any problems with the quick test of any of the exes...
J.
===
Inf
/98/Me. (That's the
> /proc implementation, not these utiltiies, which should work if the /proc
> implementation worked).
>
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1.tar.bz2
> http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1-src.tar.bz2
> ht
rk if the /proc
implementation worked).
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1.tar.bz2
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/procps-010801-1-src.tar.bz2
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/setup.hint
Chris
ready mentioned this. After installing, I tried some of
> the utils on WindowsME running the latest cvs-built dll. "procps" works
> fine except for the HZ warning message which was previously discussed
> [Unknown HZ value! (0) Assume 100.]. "top" displays the process
ioned this. After installing, I tried some of
the utils on WindowsME running the latest cvs-built dll. "procps" works
fine except for the HZ warning message which was previously discussed
[Unknown HZ value! (0) Assume 100.]. "top" displays the processes, but
every proc
On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 04:34:54PM +0100, Chris January wrote:
> I'm resubmitting this because AFAIK I've resolved all outstanding issues
> with the package and nothing's happened since then.
>
> ---
> .tar.bz2's and setup.hint can be found here:
> http:/
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Chris January wrote:
> Are there any outstanding issues with the procps package that are
> preventing it from being included in the net release?
Chris,
I lost track about that. Could you please begin at the "ITP"
point again, provid
I'm resubmitting this because AFAIK I've resolved all outstanding issues
with the package and nothing's happened since then.
---
.tar.bz2's and setup.hint can be found here:
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~ccj00/procps-010801/
setup.hint:
sdesc: "Utilities for monitoring you
Are there any outstanding issues with the procps package that are preventing
it from being included in the net release?
Chris
Hello Chris,
Thursday, June 27, 2002, 3:58:34 AM, you wrote:
CJ> Following the recent introduction of /proc to Cygwin, I have ported the
CJ> Linux procps utilities to Cygwin. This is my first package submission, so
CJ> please don't flame me too hotly if I've done something w
Following the recent introduction of /proc to Cygwin, I have ported the
Linux procps utilities to Cygwin. This is my first package submission, so
please don't flame me too hotly if I've done something wrong.
.tar.bz2's and setup.hint can be found here:
http://www.doc.ic.ac.u
88 matches
Mail list logo
