Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:18:54PM +0100, Peter Tribble wrote: > > >> My *very strong* preference is to supply top - I much prefer it >> (and most of my users do too). If you don't ship top, then you'll >> keep having people request it be integrated. >> >> (There's room for debate here - top 3.5.x or 3.6? I know I prefer >> the traditional 3.5.x.) >> > > Can you enumerate the specific differences that have led to your > preference for top, or for 3.5? That sort of feedback to the > Approachability Group would seem useful in deciding how best to make > prstat provide what you're looking for. > I think the first thing to decide is if the issue is that there is some functionality missing in prstat which top provides, or if people just want top. From the discussion, it seems to be the later.
If they "just want top", making prstat look and walk like top doesn't seem like a good idea. We would be constantly out-of-sync with any additions to top which would be dissatisfiers. prstat takes on the attributes of a mondo code fork from top. Personally, top/prstat don't strike me as tools where compatibility is important. Our resources (Sun and non-Sun) are probably better spent on other issues. But then again, that's just my opinion. - jek3
