From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 13 14:52:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04CBE16A412 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:52:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from keramida@FreeBSD.org) Received: from igloo.linux.gr (igloo.linux.gr [62.1.205.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C44743D58 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:52:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gothmog.pc (host5.bedc.ondsl.gr [62.103.39.229]) (authenticated bits=128) by igloo.linux.gr (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-2) with ESMTP id k8DEpsTZ015830 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:51:57 +0300 Received: from gothmog.pc (gothmog [127.0.0.1]) by gothmog.pc (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k8DEqFCd060823; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:52:15 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from giorgos@localhost) by gothmog.pc (8.13.7/8.13.7/Submit) id k8DEqE82060822; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:52:14 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:52:14 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Bob Hall , Free BSD Questions list Message-ID: <20060913145214.GA60794@gothmog.pc> References: <20060910125631.GA29818@teddy.fas.com> <20060910155704.GA49622@kongemord.krig.net> <20060910220404.GB11266@teddy.fas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060910220404.GB11266@teddy.fas.com> X-Hellug-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Hellug-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.884, required 5, autolearn=not spam, AWL -0.29, BAYES_00 -2.60, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 0.00) X-Hellug-MailScanner-From: keramida@freebsd.org X-Spam-Status: No Cc: Subject: Re: Top behavior differences X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:52:17 -0000 On 2006-09-10 18:04, stan wrote: > On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:57:05AM -0400, Bob Hall wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 08:56:31AM -0400, stan wrote: > > > Can someone explain to me why top's handling of multi processor > > > status display is different on FreeBSD, than it is on Linux? > > > > Open source started with the concept of individuals hacking the source > > code to get the features they want. The commericial ideal of users paying > > for features they want was replaced by the ideal of users doing the work > > to create the features they want. Open source has evolved into the > > concept of many users getting a free ride as a relatively small number > > of open source programmers do the work for them, without pay. > > > > Possible reasons why open source software X doesn't have feature Y: > > > -- Long discussion of open source philosophy dleted --- > > Once upon a time, when people posted on lists like this, they got > well reasoned technical answers. > > The question I was really asking, is if there is a technical > reason for this difference (eg difernt sturctures for obatining > the information in the 2 OS's). The reason that i feel this is > an apropriate place to ask such a question, is that top is NOT > a port, but is provided by the base OS in FreeBSD. There are technical reasons. The top(1) utility peeks into kernel structures, such as process lists, memory usage information and other stuff, and our current FreeBSD version has been changed, fixed and augmented with new features as FreeBSD was developed. I doubt that it can run unmodified on Linux. What sort of technical details are you interested in? I've made some changes to top(1) myself, so maybe I can tell you what the differences are if you have something specific in mind :) - Giorgos