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@candle.pha.pa.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)