Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Shipping "lsof" with Solaris ? / was: Re: problem with /tmp FS still up

2007-01-05 Thread John Plocher
UNIX admin wrote: `lsof` peeks into private Solaris kernel structs and is likely to crash if those are changed. So my hair stands up on my head when I sit in management meetings and one of my collagues whines why we can't have `lsof` integrated in our internal build of Solaris... absolutely hor

[osol-discuss] Re: Shipping "lsof" with Solaris ? / was: Re: problem with /tmp FS still up

2007-01-05 Thread UNIX admin
> Really? > > Take 1: > /bin/sh < /dev/urandom > Illegal Instruction (core dumped) > > Take 2-29: > cat /var/adm/messages* | grep -F core.sh | sort You can take "takes" 'till the cows come home, but the day Solaris breaks backward compatibility is the day Solaris will become crap, just like som

[osol-discuss] Re: Shipping "lsof" with Solaris ? / was: Re: problem with /tmp FS still up

2007-01-05 Thread UNIX admin
> In the current implementation for Solaris it pokes > around in kernel > memory and it has no business doing so, it can and > will break. Right; according to the author of `lsof` himself, `lsof` peeks into private Solaris kernel structs and is likely to crash if those are changed. This is what