[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612261549050.24795@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:55:27 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lang <david.lang@...italinsight.com>
To: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David McCullough <david_mccullough@...securecomputing.com>
Subject: Re: Feature request: exec self for NOMMU.
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, Rob Landley wrote:
> I'm trying to make some nommu-friendly busybox-like tools, which means using
> vfork() instead of fork(). This means that after I fork I have to exec in
> the child to unblock the parent, and if I want to exec my current executable
> I have to find out where it lives so I can feed the path to exec(). This is
> nontrivial.
>
> Worse, it's not always possible. If chroot() has happened since the program
> started, there may not _be_ a path to my current executable available from
> this process's current or root directories.
does this even make sense (as a general purpose function)? if the executable
isn't available in your path it's likly that any config files it needs are not
available either.
> What would be really nice is if I could feed a NULL path to exec on NOMMU
> systems, and have that mean "re-exec the current executable". I can't think
> of a way to do this without kernel support. Any opinions on whether this is
> worthwhile?
for something like busybox/toolbox where you have different functions based on
the name used to execute the program, which name would you use?
David Lang
> A nommu-friendly daemonize() is another use for this, by the way...
>
> Rob
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists