From dc1531b21122f2dc7bd3597897700e0bf44977ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Craig Small Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 20:50:34 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] Removed bogus bogus -aux message This message has been here for ages and either people ignore it because they are so used to using -aux or never see it. It was here before 2005 and really 7 years is enought time to people to change their ways. The notice is now removed, people who make usenames like "x" deserve all the punishment they can get. Bug-Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/670592 --- NEWS | 4 ++++ ps/parser.c | 29 ----------------------------- ps/ps.1 | 11 +++++++++++ 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS index d3345e99..32cc76dd 100644 --- a/NEWS +++ b/NEWS @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +procps-ng-3.3.4 +--------------- + * Removed ps -aux bogus message + procps-ng-3.3.3 --------------- * watch -g command repeats until something changes diff --git a/ps/parser.c b/ps/parser.c index 0c0b4bd9..eaba306a 100644 --- a/ps/parser.c +++ b/ps/parser.c @@ -1221,35 +1221,6 @@ try_bsd: err2 = select_bits_setup(); if(err2) goto total_failure; - // Feel a need to patch this out? First of all, read the FAQ. - // Second of all, talk to me. Without this warning, people can - // get seriously confused. Ask yourself if users would freak out - // about "ps -aux" suddenly changing behavior if a user "x" were - // added to the system. - // - // Also, a "-x" option is coming. It's already there in fact, - // for some non-default personalities. So "ps -ax" will parse - // as SysV options... and you're screwed if you've been patching - // out the friendly warning. Cut-over is likely to be in 2005. -#ifdef BUILD_WITH_WHINE - // Slackware: - // IMO, people can change old habits if and when user 'x' comes - // along. I still find this warning to be a POLA violation. No - // offense... that's the beauty of open source. You've got your - // ideas about this, and I have mine, and we're allowed to - // disagree. Nothing in the UNIX or POSIX standards requires - // this (annoying) warning to be displayed, and we're not - // changing the actual behavior of ps in any way. I know of no - // other 'ps' that produces this message. - if(!(personality & PER_FORCE_BSD)) - fprintf(stderr, _("warning: bad ps syntax, perhaps a bogus '-'?\n" - "See http://gitorious.org/procps/procps/blobs/master/Documentation/FAQ\n")); -#endif - // Remember: contact procps@freelists.org - // if you should feel tempted. Be damn sure you understand all - // the issues. The same goes for other stuff too, BTW. Please ask. - // I'm happy to justify various implementation choices. - choose_dimensions(); return 0; diff --git a/ps/ps.1 b/ps/ps.1 index e251b02d..e5380099 100644 --- a/ps/ps.1 +++ b/ps/ps.1 @@ -803,6 +803,17 @@ if the parent process exits. .PP If the length of the username is greater than the length of the display column, the numeric user ID is displayed instead. +.PP +Commands options such as +.B ps +.I\-aux +are not recommended as it is a confusion of two different standards. +According to the POSIX and UNIX standards, the above command asks to +display all processes with a TTY (generally the commands users are +running) plus all processes owned by a user named "x". If that user +doesn't exist, then +.B ps +will assume you really meant "\fBps\fR \fIaux\fR". .SH "PROCESS FLAGS" The sum of these values is displayed in the "F" column, which is provided by the