From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Pawel Baldysiak <pawel.baldysiak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: mdadm/mdmon Name vs argv[0]
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 15:40:00 +0200
Message-ID: <3f64ba3e-e931-6055-8621-a91c637e0174@intel.com>
References: <a61470a2-2c3b-3f4a-5712-dfb87f3acad8@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <a61470a2-2c3b-3f4a-5712-dfb87f3acad8@gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

On 05/02/2017 04:19 PM, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> Hi Pawel,
> 
> In the below commit you changed the handling of how mdadm/mdmon handles 
> printing the name of the running process.
> 
> However, if people for some reason decided to change the names of 
> mdadm/mdmon this would no longer be correct.
> 
> Do you remember if there is any reason why you didn't use argv[0] for this?
> 
> commit d56dd607ba433d9334f0fb4114fe081742ae4361
> Author: Pawel Baldysiak <pawel.baldysiak@intel.com>
> Date:   Wed Feb 11 22:25:03 2015 +0100
> 
>      Change way of printing name of a process
> 
> Cheers,
> Jes
Hi Jes,

We did not consider this option once we were implementing the change.
Also, I was not considering that someone would like to change the 
mdadm/mdmon names :)

I see one potential issue with usage of argv[0]:
If you look into mdmon's code (start of the main()),
you will see that first char is replaced with '@'.

Thanks
Pawel