[arch-general] New version of "top"?

[Karol Blazewicz]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf at rocketmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:54:42 +0100
> Michael Alt <micha.developing at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Vladimir Nikšić <vniksic at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I noticed that after a last "$pacman -Syu" that I got a pretty
>> > different version of the utility top in the package procps-ng. What
>> > exactly happened, how can I get the old-style one back?
>>
>> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1474872#p1474872
>
> Thank you Micha,
>
> too funny, I didn't noticed it myself, I seemingly didn't run top since
> $ grep procps-ng /var/log/pacman.log
> [snip]
> [2014-11-14 09:06] [PACMAN] upgraded procps-ng (3.3.9-3 -> 3.3.10-1)
>
> For my needs, on my dual-core machine, I first thought I'll stay with
> the new design, excepted of the grotesque colour theme, so I followed
> this advice: "fwiw, just disabling colors with "z" and writing config
> with "W" seems enough to stop the eye cancer for me."
>
> What ever kind of colour theme is chosen, after following this advice
> the theme is monochrome again, black on white or white on black etc..
>
> Then I noticed that the resourced hungriest process wasn't listet when
> I run top, but a bunch of irrelevant systemd process were shown, so I
> installed procps-ng-classic, but this alone didn't bring back the old
> useful top, I needed to remove ~/.toprc too and now the resource
> hungriest process is shown again.
>
> What exactly is the new style good for, if it can happen, that the
> resource hungriest process isn't listed, while absolutely irrelevant
> processes are listed?
>
> IMO Arch Linux shouldn't follow upstream, if upstream decide to do
> something that idiotic for a much used command line tool.
>
> 2 Cents,
> Ralf

I followed procps-ng-sucks suggestions and my procps-ng top works for
me - shows the resource hogs just fine. You can use htop if you want.