--IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> > > Would it make sense to have a way of asking for processes with a
> > > running time less than a specified value, or in a specified range?
> >=20
> > Less then can be doine via "-v -r N".
>=20
> Not if you want to combine it with searching for a process by name; the
> "-v" would invert both the name and the running time.

True.  But I think that's the current behaviour for any with "-v", since
"-v" simply does "!(condition1 && condition2)", and there's no way to
say "(!condition1) && condition2".

-Jan

--=20
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely
foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.

--IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFGq3fMfFtkr68iakwRAmFiAJ9RmjEEkWOTIt3zHtxbPcdGr8VdVgCbBL3T
pY7ZXJvub6d28sb0o88bEC4=
=/zE4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o--