From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265087AbUHRIc7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:32:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265091AbUHRIc6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:32:58 -0400 Received: from madrid10.amenworld.com ([62.193.203.32]:2314 "EHLO madrid10.amenworld.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265087AbUHRIcj (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2004 04:32:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:28:51 +0200 From: DervishD To: Linux-kernel Subject: setproctitle Message-ID: <20040818082851.GA32519@DervishD> Mail-Followup-To: Linux-kernel Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Organization: Pleyades Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi all :) Is there any special reason not to implement setproctitle in the kernel? In user space is a bit difficult to implement since 'argv[0]' cannot grow beyond the initially allocated space, better said, it can grow but only changing the pointer to another place or eating the space occupied by the other arguments. proftpd has a not-very-polite set_proc_title that misses the final NULL, and a couple of other programs out there uses it, too. Applications should be free to change theirs proc titles to some pretty if they want, shouldn't they? In proc/base.c you can read about 'setproctitle(3)', that is, in library space (user space), not kernel space, but AFAIK only FreeBSD has setproctitle :? Thanks in advance :) Raúl Núñez de Arenas Coronado -- Linux Registered User 88736 http://www.pleyades.net & http://raul.pleyades.net/