Unified ps(1) [PSARC/2009/076 FastTrack timeout 02/16/2009]

[James Carlson]

Casper.Dik at Sun.COM writes:
> >First off, I really like what this case is trying to do.  But I do have 
> >a possible concern:  /usr/ucb/ps could have been used with  a leading 
> >"-".  E.g. /usr/ucb/ps -aux and /usr/ucb/ps aux both return the same thing.
> >
> >I'd humbly suggest that if getexecname returns /usr/ucb/ps then the 
> >legacy UCB behavior should be used unconditionally.
> 
> What I propose isn't all that different.  /usr/ucb/ps will ONLY behave
> like /usr/bin/ps IF AND ONLY IF one of the arguments is NOT recognized by
> /usr/ucb/ps.  Rather than printing an error message, it tries to do
> something plausible.
> 
> I thought the examples clarified that.

OK; I got tripped up by the implication of the "aren't ucb ps options"
part.  It's a little surprising to see non-UCB behavior showing up in
the explicit /usr/ucb path, but it makes sense to me now.

Thanks.  +1 to the original.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677