Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-15 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 11:54 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 07:07:54PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 16:06 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:22:27 -0800, Steve Langasek > > > wrote: > > > >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +,

Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-15 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 07:07:54PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 16:06 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:22:27 -0800, Steve Langasek > > wrote: > > >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > >> Steve Langasek dixit: > > >> >(For v

Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-15 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 16:06 +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:22:27 -0800, Steve Langasek > wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > >> Steve Langasek dixit: > > > >> >(For values of "permanently" that include "we now have two implementations > >

Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-15 Thread Marc Haber
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:22:27 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >> Steve Langasek dixit: > >> >(For values of "permanently" that include "we now have two implementations >> >of sh in Essential, because no one has done the work to let us g

Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-10 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Steve Langasek dixit: > >(For values of "permanently" that include "we now have two implementations > >of sh in Essential, because no one has done the work to let us get rid of > >bash".) > Maybe because the offered alternative su

Re: procps with pidof is released

2013-12-10 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Steve Langasek dixit: >(For values of "permanently" that include "we now have two implementations >of sh in Essential, because no one has done the work to let us get rid of >bash".) Maybe because the offered alternative sucks so much. I’d happily split mksh into mksh and mksh-static, make the la