This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Is there a more Linux consistent version of ps?
- From: aputerguy <nabble at kosowsky dot org>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:58:32 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Is there a more Linux consistent version of ps?
I have been wondering about this for a long time...
The ps command on cygwin and Linux use incompatible options & flags and
display incompatible output formats. Additionally, linux ps is much more
feature rich.
While I could live with fewer features, the incompatibility in basic input
options and the lack of consistent output format is a PITA since it breaks
many of my scripts. Compatibility here is important since 'ps' is such a
basic script building block used all the time to get info about other
processes.
Now I could understand that differences in Windows and Linux architecture
could lead to some features being implementable on one platform vs. the
other, but I don't understand why there seems to be little if any consistent
overlap.
Perhaps this is all a POSIX vs. not POSIX thing or something like that but I
would like to understand what the advantages are of the current approach and
why in particular the 'ps' on cygwin seems so underpowered and inconsistent.
--
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Is-there-a-more-Linux-consistent-version-of-ps--tp26500161p26500161.html
Sent from the Cygwin list mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple