From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTuuU-00008e-NQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:16:06 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LTuuQ-00008R-GX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:16:05 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41723 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LTuuQ-00008O-9n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:16:02 -0500 Received: from [84.20.150.76] (port=57217 helo=narury.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LTuuQ-00018U-0V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 04:16:02 -0500 Received: from kos.to (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by narury.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943E53274002 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:15:50 +0200 (EET) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:15:50 +0200 From: Riku Voipio Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [6485] linux-user: identify running binary in /proc/self/exe Message-ID: <20090202091550.GA5111@kos.to> References: <761ea48b0902012359u2f73e99ajb6a1a4ea56fc0e6b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <761ea48b0902012359u2f73e99ajb6a1a4ea56fc0e6b@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 08:59:14AM +0100, Laurent Desnogues wrote: > Do we really want to skip unlock_user? indeed. I wonder how it still works when testing. will send a fix ASAP. -- "rm -rf" only sounds scary if you don't have backups