Getting "top" command to scroll down

That is the idea. The program is "top", not "bottom". To view different processes, use different options.

You can't. Google around for htop. It can.

!http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/6078/screenshot20091126at114w.png!

Eric

No prob. Happy turkey day.

I use MacPorts.

http://www.macports.org/

Eric

I detest Macports.

Install MacFUSE and then procfs and give it a try.

That's a shame.

Eric

Not at all.

Most open-source packages are build for Linux with no thought to MacOS X, Universal binaries, or anything that isn't Linux. htop is a good example. They didn't need to use procfs. I know a program even better than htop - Activity Monitor.

That being said, most open-source software builds just fine on MacOS X. It doesn't need to be "ported" to the Mac. But there are enough packages that don't build cleanly that I don't trust Fink/Macports to have compiled them correctly. Most of the time I see Fink/Macports mentioned here is in relation to some open-source tools that builds just fine on my system with no "porting" to be done, yet fails to build/link/run on some poor original poster's machine. People think Fink/Macports is the way to install open-source software on the Mac. That is wrong.

Sorry for the rant, but you opened the door 🙂 Granted, I left said door unlocked with my statement. That's what curiosity gets you.

etresoft wrote:
Not at all.
People think Fink/Macports is the way to install open-source software on the Mac. That is wrong.

I'm not one of those people. But you could make the same argument against apt-get and other 'nix package tools.

Sorry for the rant, but you opened the door 🙂 Granted, I left said door unlocked with my statement. That's what curiosity gets you.

Wasn't curious. I think advising to install a kernel extension though is bad advise in this situation.

Anyway, happy turkey day.

Eric

ericmeyers wrote:
But you could make the same argument against apt-get and other 'nix package tools.

Not quite. On Gentoo, for example, the vendor gives you the package tool. Plus, there aren't universal binary issues on Linux. On MacOS X, the vendor (Apple) gives you everything you need. If you want to take a shortcut with Fink/Macports and try to link that with Vendor stuff - fine. But when it breaks, people ask for help on Apple discussions.

I think advising to install a kernel extension though is bad advise in this situation.

That is why I also advised Activity Monitor. It is better than htop. But if you really want htop, I think MacFUSE is a far safer and less invasive way to get it done than Macports. Plus, it is really useful.

etresoft wrote:

ericmeyers wrote:

I think MacFUSE is a far safer and less invasive way to get it done than Macports. Plus, it is really useful.

Great. When that extension fails from an Apple update, or he suffers from one of the known MacFuse issues you can help him track it down.

Eric

ericmeyers wrote:
Great. When that extension fails from an Apple update, or he suffers from one of the known MacFuse issues you can help him track it down.

MacFUSE is one of the most reliable extensions around. It works fine under Snow Leopard with no updates needed.

If I had to choose which non-Apple 3rd party software to support on the Apple Discussion forums, I would pick MacFUSE. No one ever has problems with it, unlike Fink/Macports. Any time someone has trouble compiling some open-source software on MacOS X, you can bet Fink/Macports is going to be in the works.

this version of htop built easily for me on osx
http://github.com/AndyA/htop-osx
you can get the zip version if you don't use git