From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May 12 13:05:35 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4E916A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 12 May 2005 13:05:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from cs1.cs.huji.ac.il (cs1.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D40643D68
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 12 May 2005 13:05:35 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32])
	by cs1.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp
	id 1DWDNe-0005AE-3p; Thu, 12 May 2005 16:05:34 +0300
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.0 06/18/2004 with nmh-1.0.4
To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: Message from Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> 
   of "Wed, 11 May 2005 13:24:47 EDT." <42823FDF.7060106@mac.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 16:05:33 +0300
From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
Message-ID: <E1DWDNe-0005AE-3p@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: Oliver Brandmueller <ob@e-Gitt.NET>
Subject: Re: Strange top(1) output 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 13:05:35 -0000

> Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> > On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:54:59AM -0400, Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote:
> >>Wasn't the old max length of GECOS 8 chars? Setting it to anything less 
> >>starts to become too short -- You're better off just outputting the UID.
> > 
> > I vote for removing (or make it optional) the code that measures 
> > username lengths. I have a system with >90k users (in LDAP) and it takes 
> > quite some time to find out the longest (just to cut the number down to 
> > 13 afterwards anyway). This even happens with "-u" in the standard top.
> 
> +1.  It's silly to scan the list of users to find the length of the longest 
> username, just in order to make the output *not* fit into 80 columns.  :-)

maybe the time has come to drop the 80 col. limit? it's been around for more
that 100 years, and screens (most of them) can be streched :-)

danny