On 3/28/2011 13:04, Antha Lamus wrote:
> Hi all,
> I recently installed a newer version of bash and now the "ps" command
> does not issue anything anymore (return code is 128). in fact, even
> the options seem different as I don't see "-W" in the man anymore.
> also, I can pretty much issue anythin
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 17:14:20, Paul McFerrin wrote:
>
> Is there a way to get "ps" to display more on the COMMAND column?
Use the "procps" command instead. It works like the "ps" command on
Linux. For example I use the following command:
procps -e -o user,pid,ppid,sess,tty8,start,time,cmd -w
Paul McFerrin wrote on Tuesday, January 13, 2009 5:14 PM:
> Is there a way to get "ps" to display more on the COMMAND column?
Doesn't look like it. But try
$ pstree -a
$ procps -f
$ procps -F
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwi
On May 22 12:29, Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> The Cygwin ps allows to watch Windows processes also (with -W). Is
> that possible for procps, too?
procps uses /proc to retrieve process information. Non-Cygwin processes
don't show up in /proc.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, se
* Brian Dessent (Mon, 21 May 2007 22:34:50 -0700)
> Brian Salter-Duke wrote:
> > because qseek is a perl script. Is there any way that I can get output
> > of the running processes that will include the text, 'qseek'? Or can
> > anyone suggest a work around. I need a script to be able to find out
>
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 10:34:50PM -0700, Brian Dessent wrote:
> Brian Salter-Duke wrote:
>
> > because qseek is a perl script. Is there any way that I can get output
> > of the running processes that will include the text, 'qseek'? Or can
> > anyone suggest a work around. I need a script to be ab
Brian Salter-Duke wrote:
> because qseek is a perl script. Is there any way that I can get output
> of the running processes that will include the text, 'qseek'? Or can
> anyone suggest a work around. I need a script to be able to find out
> whether qseek is running, in order to start it if it is
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:55:53 -0400 (EDT), Igor Pechtchanski
> According to the "ps.cc" source (which, at the moment, seems to be the
> best documentation for the status column)
Thanks Igor. The official documentation is now being updated to
include this information...
--
Unsubscribe info: h
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Shaffer, Kenneth wrote:
> I recently ran the ps command and saw an unknown flag, "I", displayed in
> column 1. There was no heading above it and the man page wasn't much
> help.
>
> What does this mean? Where can I find documentation on perhaps other
> flags?
> --
> Ken Shaf
--On Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:39 PM +1000 Robert Collins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > What is the 'System process'?
>>
>> Look at the output from the Task Manager.
>
> Sure, there's no 'System process'. Do you mean the
> 'System Idle process' aka the scheduler?
>
> Rob
No, it's a separ
--On Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:23 AM -0400 Christopher Faylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:59:08PM -0400, Alan Dobkin wrote:
>> I don't intend to submit a patch for this either, at least not
>> any time soon, but I would be happy to provide information and
>> testi
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:24 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ps command - revisited
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 02:03:15PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
&g
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 02:03:15PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Alan Dobkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:59 PM
>
>>Similarly, the System process should be identified as such instead of
>>unknown.
>
>What is the 'System proc
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:59:08PM -0400, Alan Dobkin wrote:
>>The functionality you see now is all that I plan on providing.
>>
>>Patches are, as always, gratefully accepted, however.
>
>I don't intend to submit a patch for this either, at least not any time
>soon, but I would be happy to provide
> -Original Message-
> From: Alan Dobkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 1:59 PM
> Similarly,
> the System process should be identified as such instead of unknown.
What is the 'System process'?
Rob
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsub
--On Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:08 PM -0400 Christopher Faylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As with so many other things in Cygwin, what you see is what
> you get from the underlying Windows API that we're using. If
> certain processes aren't showing up when we say "give me all
> of your proc
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:59:36PM -0400, Alan Dobkin wrote:
>I don't know why Chris's process isn't showing up, but I can attest to
>the fact that all Windows processes, including those associated with
>services *do* appear in the ps -W output, with only two exceptions: the
>System Idle Process (
I don't know why Chris's process isn't showing up, but I can
attest to the fact that all Windows processes, including those
associated with services *do* appear in the ps -W output, with
only two exceptions: the System Idle Process (PID #0) and the
CSRSS.EXE (Client/Server Run-Time Subsystem)
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:42PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi all, specially Corinna,
>
>Corinna, maybe you can help out here. The UNIX ps command reports all and
>every process running on the machine, the Windows (cygwin) ps command
>however, omits WinNT/Win2K services, which is somethin
TECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 23:44
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: ps command - revisited
>
> Been there, done that - that's not it. I can see this process in 'Task
> Manager':
> admsrvc.exe, pid=508, it's runn
---
> From: Roland Glenn McIntosh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:25 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Ruprecht, Chris
> Subject: Re: ps command - revisited
>
>
> *sigh* RTFM.
>
> ps -Wef
>
> -rgm
>
> At 05:17 P
*sigh* RTFM.
ps -Wef
-rgm
At 05:17 PM 04.09.2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi all, specially Corinna,
>
>Corinna, maybe you can help out here. The UNIX ps command reports all and
>every process running on the machine, the Windows (cygwin) ps command
>however, omits WinNT/Win2K services, which
22 matches
Mail list logo
