On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 04:03:55PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> I have now promoted this branch from jkoenig/master to master -- it is
> the procfs variant that we've been using ever since, and the two
> different branches recently confused Richard.
That was quick, thanks.
--
Richard Braun
Hi!
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:35:10 +0200, I wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 05:32:10PM +0200, Jeremie Koenig wrote:
> > I have been working on a rewrite of procfs.
>
> Cool, thanks!
>
> > $ git remote add jk git://github.com/jeremie-koenig/hurd.git
> > $ git fetch jk
> > $ git checkout jk/p
Hello!
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 05:32:10PM +0200, Jeremie Koenig wrote:
> I have been working on a rewrite of procfs.
Cool, thanks!
> $ git remote add jk git://github.com/jeremie-koenig/hurd.git
> $ git fetch jk
> $ git checkout jk/procfs # Add "-b procfs" to create a local branch.
I put
Jeremie Koenig, le Sat 04 Sep 2010 17:47:58 +0200, a écrit :
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 05:10:04PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Jeremie Koenig, le Sat 04 Sep 2010 01:07:21 +0200, a écrit :
> > > How about "--default-owner" or "--default-uid" ?
> >
> > "default" could imply that it's used for m
On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 05:10:04PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Jeremie Koenig, le Sat 04 Sep 2010 01:07:21 +0200, a écrit :
> > How about "--default-owner" or "--default-uid" ?
>
> "default" could imply that it's used for much more cases than just this
> one. What about "no-owner"?
Maybe "no
Jeremie Koenig, le Sat 04 Sep 2010 01:07:21 +0200, a écrit :
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 09:16:50PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> (...)
> > > Ah, so it's really not like "nobody", that's for tasks whose owner is
> > > yet unknown, but potentially root-owned or such, or something like this?
>
> The
Hi, sorry I did not answer that one earlier.
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 09:16:50PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
(...)
> > Ah, so it's really not like "nobody", that's for tasks whose owner is
> > yet unknown, but potentially root-owned or such, or something like this?
These tasks (for instance the
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 02 Sep 2010 01:00:14 +0200, a écrit :
> Jeremie Koenig, le Wed 01 Sep 2010 13:04:33 +0200, a écrit :
> > On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 01:06:32AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > { "anonymous-owner", 'a', "USER", 0,
> > > > "Make USER the owner of files related to
Alexander Preisinger, le Thu 02 Sep 2010 09:46:18 +0200, a écrit :
> I tested this new translator with pidof and killall5 and it works
> fantastic. I hope it replaces the old procfs translator soon, because
> the initscripts in Arch Hurd heavily depend on pidof.
Well, as the previous procfs implem
Hy,
Thanks for the great work.
I tested this new translator with pidof and killall5 and it works
fantastic. I hope it replaces the old procfs translator soon, because
the initscripts in Arch Hurd heavily depend on pidof.
Jeremie Koenig, le Wed 01 Sep 2010 13:04:33 +0200, a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 01:06:32AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > { "anonymous-owner", 'a', "USER", 0,
> > > "Make USER the owner of files related to processes without one. "
> > > "Be aware that USER will be granted acces
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 01:06:32AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > { "anonymous-owner", 'a', "USER", 0,
> > "Make USER the owner of files related to processes without one. "
> > "Be aware that USER will be granted access to the environment and "
> > "other sensitive informat
Heya,
Just some general comments.
> { "anonymous-owner", 'a', "USER", 0,
> "Make USER the owner of files related to processes without one. "
> "Be aware that USER will be granted access to the environment and "
> "other sensitive information about the processes in question.
Hi,
I have been working on a rewrite of procfs. I believe this new
implementation is now ready for broader scrutiny, and I have retrofitted
it into a git branch off the upstream Hurd repository.
- What it can do
I have successfully tested it with most of the Linux procps utilities,
as well as bu
14 matches
Mail list logo
