Re: [HACKERS] removing the exec() from doexec()

>
> > > On Wed, 29 Apr 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > > No reason for the exec(). I believe the only advantage is that it gives
> > > > us a separate process name in the 'ps' listing. I have looked into
> > > > simulating this.
> > >
> > > Under FreeBSD, there is:
> > >
> > > setproctitle(3) - set the process title for ps 1
> > >
> > > This isn't available under Solaris though, last I checked...
> >
> > Not even BSDI, which is BSD 4.4 like FreeBSD.
>
> ubik:~$ uname -a
> Linux ubik 2.0.32 #1 Wed Nov 19 00:46:45 EST 1997 i586 unknown
> ubik:~$ perl -e '$0 = "it_works!";system "ps p $$"'
> PID TTY STAT TIME COMMAND
> 7629 p8 S 0:00 it_works!

Let me clarify. BSDI does not have setproctitle, but the perl test does
works, sort of:

$ perl -e '$0 = "it_works!";system "ps -p $$"'
PID TT STAT TIME COMMAND
13095 pc S+ 0:00.02 it_works! rks! ! (perl)

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)