[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170709140426.GB27260@example.net>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2017 16:04:26 +0200
From: u-uy74@...ey.se
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Question about setting argv[0] when manually using
dynamic linker
On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 08:23:25AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 11:23:23AM +0200, u-uy74@...ey.se wrote:
> > What about always passing on the loader argv[0] unless --argv0 is present?
> > This will not matter for programs which do not analyze argv[0]
> > and will not make it worse for programs which do.
>
> This would be a regression in existing behavior and basically breaks
> any scripts where the program run wants argv[0] to be its own name.
Indeed, this _can_ make it worse for programs run from existing scripts.
This makes my suggestion moot.
> Otherwise I agree it would be a nicer interface. But I don't see any
> reason your invoking program can't just pass the same string it passes
> as argv[0] at exec time also as the argument to --argv0.
Certainly it can, this just happens to be practically inconvenient.
Such a change needs some new config syntax, some coding, testing,
documentation and then modification and testing of a noticeable number of
configuration instances. Sigh. Given that the "existing scripts depending
on the old behaviour" are irrelevant here, it does not feel right. :)
Of course this is not an argument for upstream.
Never mind, we can either bite the bullet and use --argv0 as it is meant
to, or make the "pass-on" change to our copy of the dynloader.
Thanks (for musl and for --argv0) !
Rune
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
