Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: _killall on linux
- X-seq: zsh-workers 12210
- From: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: _killall on linux
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 11:43:28 +0200 (MET DST)
- In-reply-to: "Bart Schaefer"'s message of Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:31:03 +0000
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Bart Schaefer wrote:
> ...
>
> } At least I thought it would be easier...
>
> It's only easier that way if you know about the rule in advance (and if it
> is applied consistently, which it may very well be, I haven't looked). Is
> it mentioned as a general principle anywhere in the docs?
Well, the docs mention the processes and processes-list tags for the
command style (as examples).
The processes-names is listed together with processes and
processes-list in the tag list, of course, and processes seems to be
the only case where we needed to call _call more than once for a given
tag.
> } > [*] Rather than $( [[ "$UID" = 0 ]] && print -n xa ) I'd suggest the less
> } > resource-intensive ${=EUID//(#s)0(#e)/ps xa}.
> }
> } I wouldn't be agains that patch. But I think it raises the question if
> } we should add other default for some systems, such as -u$USER.
>
> As it turns out, the _call to ps is already in a linux-specific section
> of _killall, so the syntax for other variants of ps is irrelevant.
Ah. Sorry. I was looking at _pids.
Well, then...
Bye
Sven
--
Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author