Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 16:54:16 -0800 From: NGie Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Kurt Lidl <lidl@pix.net>, "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> Subject: Re: Missing "Local system status" Message-ID: <0697B00F-6B61-4C4B-8CD6-04F3F26C66DB@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1579252.MOChMlxT6g@ralph.baldwin.cx> References: <20150915080318.GA89697@server.rulingia.com> <55F811F1.7040202@pix.net> <20150915175222.GG1709@over-yonder.net> <1579252.MOChMlxT6g@ralph.baldwin.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Oct 30, 2015, at 10:42, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 12:52:22 PM Matthew D. Fuller wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 08:41:21AM -0400 I heard the voice of >> Kurt Lidl, and lo! it spake thus: >>>=20 >>> So the real argument ought to be if rwhod/ruptime ought to be part = of a >>> different MK_xxx, >>=20 >> I think Peter's point is that 430.status-rwho shows uptime(1) info >> too, if rwhod isn't writing out data for it to ruptime(1), so it's >> still useful even without r*. Which also means it's slightly >> misnamed, but... >=20 > Humm. I'm inclined to just always install it. Having a second > script would just duplicate code (and then having rwho in the name > would be confusing). I=E2=80=99m sorry it took so long for me to reply to this email thread. = I=E2=80=99m about ready to commit a change that will install it = unconditionally again, but will rename it to 430.status-uptime as = that=E2=80=99s what the periodic script is actually doing =E2=80=94 = checking the system uptime. Thanks, -NGie=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0697B00F-6B61-4C4B-8CD6-04F3F26C66DB>