On 2021-10-21 1:40 p.m., Matthew Vernon wrote: > Hi, > > On 20/10/2021 15:29, Jesse Smith wrote: >> Is there a reason for wanting to revert this behaviour instead of using >> the "-z" flag on the command line? If you use pidof a lot and expect to >> see processes that are in the uninterruptable sleep state then making an >> alias of pidof='pidof -z' seems like a straight forward approach. >> >> Reverting the change entirely means the default behaviour could hang in >> NFS environments and I'm not sure non-functioning is a better situation >> than skipping sleeping processes. > > The RedHat bug that was the similar issue to #719273 (i.e. that > resulted in the behaviour of pidof being changed) took a slightly > different approach - > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=138788 (patch is > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=113650&action=diff ); > did that ever make its way to upstream? >
I don't think this Red Hat patch ever made its way upstream. I'll give it a test run. If it doesn't break anything it may prove to be a good solution that makes everyone happy.
