Re: If something is not stated in POSIX we should not bother even if 90%+ of Linux system out there using it ??

From: Alexander Viro (viro@math.psu.edu)
Date: Mon Mar 06 2000 - 13:03:10 EST


On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Khimenko Victor wrote:

> Sorry for spoiling party but it's me again with old question about
> setproctitle(3) again. Even if setproctitle(3) is not posix, even if hackish
> implememtation in wu-ftpd & sendmail worked due to outstanding bug in Linux
> kernel it's not excuse to ignore the whole problem. I repeat: LOTS of programs
> out there (ftpd, sendmail & inn are just few examples) using setproctitle().

Ouch... Right thing would be to put it into libc and make those animals
use it. And it means big, fscking grep all over the place.

> userspace in 2.3 like it was possible in 2.2). Is it Ok to break TONS of
> important programs and to not propose any fix at all ?

sendmail works for me... Yes, I see the problem with ps, but it hardly
affects the functionality. So "break" is stronger than I'ld put it.

> I've sent fix to lklm few days ago and got ABSOLUTELY not responce from anyone

Care to resend it? BTW, one of the potential variants would be to make
/proc/pid/cmdline writable (for owning process and for cases a-la
PTRACE)....

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 21:00:20 EST