"Richard L. Hamilton" wrote:
> You may want to reconsider the notion of merging them, unless a _lot_ of
> work was done, and go with just having both, distinct, instead. ISTR
> discussion
> (Usenet?) of "top" being a pig with lots of processes, because it didn't hold
> the
> /proc/*/psinfo (or
> "Richard L. Hamilton" wrote:
>
> > You may want to reconsider the notion of merging
> them, unless a _lot_ of
> > work was done, and go with just having both,
> distinct, instead. ISTR discussion
> > (Usenet?) of "top" being a pig with lots of
> processes, because it didn't hold the
> > /proc/
Don Cragun wrote:
> OK. After discussing this further with the project team and management
> the following changes are being made to this case:
>
> 1. There will be no link (neither hard nor symbolic) between top and
> prstat.
> 2. The real top utility will be supplied rather than changing
Shawn Walker wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>> I think both phases of this project are a very bad idea and I do not
>>> approve of the strategy.
>>>
>>> The Solaris security team did a similar analysis for 'pfexec' vs
>>> 'sudo' for almost identical reasons as this cas
ould be the point of that? I think reusing the same case (and
>>>>> providing a more up-to-date synopsis) would be the better answer.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's probably useful, though marginally so, to look at case summaries
>>>>
; providing a more up-to-date synopsis) would be the better answer.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's probably useful, though marginally so, to look at case summaries
>>> and see that "prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like
>>> top"
er.
>>>
>>
>> It's probably useful, though marginally so, to look at case summaries
>> and see that "prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like top"
>> was withdrawn and shortly after a case was submitted and approved for
>> "top
>On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Don Cragun wrote:
>
>> 4. Technical Description:
>>4.1. Details:
>>The top utility available on Linux systems is not provided on
>>Solaris systems. Since top is the Linux utility most requested
>>by users running OpenSolaris systems,
Darren J Moffat writes:
> Given all the above this case should be marked as withdrawn sine nothing
> in the case is valid for the new proposal. A new case for delivering top
> should be started.
What would be the point of that? I think reusing the same case (and
providing a more up-to-date syno
gt; What would be the point of that? I think reusing the same case (and
> providing a more up-to-date synopsis) would be the better answer.
It's probably useful, though marginally so, to look at case summaries
and see that "prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like top&quo
Shawn Walker writes:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> > As for me, I'd agree with phase 2, if phase 2 provides near-enough
> > approximation of functionality that users are unlikely to notice the
> > difference. But phase 1 seems more and more like a terrible idea.
>
> Phase 1 solves the problem of "
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Don Cragun wrote:
> I'm sponsoring this case for Craig Mohrman.
> The project team is requesting a minor release binding.
> The timer expires Tuesday, August 26, 2008.
>
>
>The intent for Phase 2 will be to add features to prstat so
>that when prst
ng a new case?
>
> Dunno, but if not the IAM does need to be updated so the case shows up
> as "top for OpenSolaris" instead of "prstat utility enhancements to look
> and act more like top."
>
> Nico
>
Okay, so while providing (shipping) unix top seem
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> I think both phases of this project are a very bad idea and I do not
>> approve of the strategy.
>>
>> The Solaris security team did a similar analysis for 'pfexec' vs
>> 'sudo' for almost identical reasons as this case. Like this case we
>> pl
I think both phases of this project are a very bad idea and I do not
approve of the strategy.
The Solaris security team did a similar analysis for 'pfexec' vs 'sudo'
for almost identical reasons as this case. Like this case we planed to
initially ship a symlink pfexec -> sudo and later enhance
OK. After discussing this further with the project team and management
the following changes are being made to this case:
1. There will be no link (neither hard nor symbolic) between top and
prstat.
2. The real top utility will be supplied rather than changing prstat.
3. The top utility wi
> As I understand it, prstat was originally created as
> a Sun version of top. Would it not be better to take
> this opportunity to merge the 2?
>
> I prefer top as it has the ability to kill processes
> and the summary information it gives. Unfortunately
> there are things that top doesn't report
Shawn Walker wrote:
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>>> I think both phases of this project are a very bad idea and I do not
>>> approve of the strategy.
>>>
>>> The Solaris security team did a similar analysis for 'pfexec' vs
>>> 'sudo' for almost identical reasons as this cas
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> I think both phases of this project are a very bad idea and I do not
> approve of the strategy.
>
> The Solaris security team did a similar analysis for 'pfexec' vs
> 'sudo' for almost identical reasons as this case. Like this case we
> planed to initially ship a symlin
As I understand it, prstat was originally created as a Sun version of top.
Would it not be better to take this opportunity to merge the 2?
I prefer top as it has the ability to kill processes and the summary
information it gives. Unfortunately there are things that top doesn't report on
- like
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Peter Tribble wrote:
>>
>> What customers want, need, and expect, is top. The real thing.
>>
>> Please scrap this idea and just ship top. Not only will it actually
>> meet customers
>> needs but it is substantially less effort.
>>
>> The o
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Don Cragun wrote:
> 4. Technical Description:
>4.1. Details:
>The top utility available on Linux systems is not provided on
>Solaris systems. Since top is the Linux utility most requested
>by users running OpenSolaris systems, we need
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 14:32 -0700, Don Cragun wrote:
> Phase 1 will make top be a link to prstat. It will simply
> invoke prstat as is. An accompanying man page for top will
> indicate what we have done and note that we are working on a
> "top like" implementation. (See t
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Don Cragun wrote:
>
>
>> 4. Technical Description:
>>4.1. Details:
>>The top utility available on Linux systems is not provided on
>>Solaris systems. Since top is the Linux utility most requested
>>by users ru
expires Tuesday, August 26, 2008.
>
> Cheers,
> Don
>
> Template Version: @(#)onepager.txt 1.35 07/11/07 SMI
> Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems
>
> 1. Introduction
>1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
> prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like top
on
>
> Template Version: @(#)onepager.txt 1.35 07/11/07 SMI
> Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems
>
> 1. Introduction
>1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
> prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like top
>
>1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier:
>
oject/Component Working Name:
prstat utility enhancements to look and act more like top
1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier:
Craig Mohrman
1.3. Date of This Document:
19 August 2008
1.4. Name of Major Document Customer(s)/Consumer(s):
1.4.2. The ARC(s) you expe
27 matches
Mail list logo
