On Apr 1 02:21, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:27 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Mar 30 03:54, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:13 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > > On Mar 29 19:32, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > > > > This patch adds the fourt
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 12:27 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 30 03:54, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:13 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > On Mar 29 19:32, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > > > This patch adds the fourth component of Linux's /proc/loadavg[1], the
> > > >
On Mar 30 03:54, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:13 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Mar 29 19:32, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > > This patch adds the fourth component of Linux's /proc/loadavg[1], the
> > > current running/total processes count. My only question is if state
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 10:13 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Mar 29 19:32, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> > This patch adds the fourth component of Linux's /proc/loadavg[1], the
> > current running/total processes count. My only question is if states
> > other than 'O' and 'R' should be considered
On Mar 29 19:32, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> This patch adds the fourth component of Linux's /proc/loadavg[1], the
> current running/total processes count. My only question is if states
> other than 'O' and 'R' should be considered "running" for this purpose.
That looks right. But I don't see tha
This patch adds the fourth component of Linux's /proc/loadavg[1], the
current running/total processes count. My only question is if states
other than 'O' and 'R' should be considered "running" for this purpose.
Patches for winsup/cygwin and winsup/doc attached.
Yaakov
[1]
http://docs.redhat.c
