Removed bogus bogus -aux message
This message has been here for ages and either people ignore it because they are so used to using -aux or never see it. It was here before 2005 and really 7 years is enought time to people to change their ways. The notice is now removed, people who make usenames like "x" deserve all the punishment they can get. Bug-Debian: http://bugs.debian.org/670592
This commit is contained in:
29
ps/parser.c
29
ps/parser.c
@ -1221,35 +1221,6 @@ try_bsd:
|
||||
err2 = select_bits_setup();
|
||||
if(err2) goto total_failure;
|
||||
|
||||
// Feel a need to patch this out? First of all, read the FAQ.
|
||||
// Second of all, talk to me. Without this warning, people can
|
||||
// get seriously confused. Ask yourself if users would freak out
|
||||
// about "ps -aux" suddenly changing behavior if a user "x" were
|
||||
// added to the system.
|
||||
//
|
||||
// Also, a "-x" option is coming. It's already there in fact,
|
||||
// for some non-default personalities. So "ps -ax" will parse
|
||||
// as SysV options... and you're screwed if you've been patching
|
||||
// out the friendly warning. Cut-over is likely to be in 2005.
|
||||
#ifdef BUILD_WITH_WHINE
|
||||
// Slackware:
|
||||
// IMO, people can change old habits if and when user 'x' comes
|
||||
// along. I still find this warning to be a POLA violation. No
|
||||
// offense... that's the beauty of open source. You've got your
|
||||
// ideas about this, and I have mine, and we're allowed to
|
||||
// disagree. Nothing in the UNIX or POSIX standards requires
|
||||
// this (annoying) warning to be displayed, and we're not
|
||||
// changing the actual behavior of ps in any way. I know of no
|
||||
// other 'ps' that produces this message.
|
||||
if(!(personality & PER_FORCE_BSD))
|
||||
fprintf(stderr, _("warning: bad ps syntax, perhaps a bogus '-'?\n"
|
||||
"See http://gitorious.org/procps/procps/blobs/master/Documentation/FAQ\n"));
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
// Remember: contact procps@freelists.org
|
||||
// if you should feel tempted. Be damn sure you understand all
|
||||
// the issues. The same goes for other stuff too, BTW. Please ask.
|
||||
// I'm happy to justify various implementation choices.
|
||||
|
||||
choose_dimensions();
|
||||
return 0;
|
||||
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user