Re: standards/18257: POSIX.2-1992: ps(1)'s TIME column has the wrong format

[Klaus Klein <kleink%kleink.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR standards/18257; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Klaus Klein <kleink%kleink.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: standards-manager%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: standards/18257: POSIX.2-1992: ps(1)'s TIME column has the wrong
 format
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 21:22:31 +0100

 On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:55:02AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR standards/18257; it has been noted by 
 > GNATS.
 > 
 > From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: standards/18257: POSIX.2-1992: ps(1)'s TIME column has the wrong
 >  format
 > Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:50:54 +0000
 > 
 >  On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 05:30:07AM +0000, Alan Barrett wrote:
 >   >  Looking at the implemetation, it appears that the output from "ps 
 >   >  ax" and "ps -ax" will be different.  I really dislike this.  If we 
 >   >  do any sort of magic format switching, then I'd like a better way, 
 >   >  and whatever we do the man page should contain a discussion of the 
 >   >  tradeoffs.
 >  
 >  Since POSIX chose to bless System V ps and we have a Berkeley ps,
 >  there's not much point in expecting (or attempting to implement) exact
 >  conformance.
 >  
 >  If there's a real reason to want a System V ps (as opposed to
 >  standards wanking) it should be a separate binary. Otherwise you end
 >  up with horrors like linux's procps.
 
 I've suggested using _CS_PATH for this before, _if_ someone really
 cares sufficiently about having a System-V-ps-done-right in the
 system to implement it.
 
 
 - Klaus