[PATCH] add exec -a support (preliminary)
Denys Vlasenko
vda.linux at googlemail.com
Tue Apr 18 17:49:17 UTC 2017
Fixed in current git.
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Patrick Pief <p.pief at zoho.com> wrote:
> ---- On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 15:22:39 +0100 Patrick Pief <p.pief at zoho.com> wrote ----
> > ---- On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 07:30:46 +0100 Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux at googlemail.com> wrote ----
> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Patrick Pief <p.pief at zoho.com> wrote:
> > > > There were several times where I thought that having "exec -a" in busybox would
> > > > be neat, and while "exec -a" is not POSIX it is still supported in a lot of
> > > > shells (see http://unix.stackexchange.com/q/250681/117599 ).
> > >
> > > It can be reasonably easily implemented, but I have hard time imagining
> > > why would you need it in real-world usage.
> > >
> > > Usually when people ask for something I assume they do need it
> > > (and can imagine some scenarios). In this case, I don't see them.
> > >
> > > Why do you need it?
> > >
> >
> > Last time I needed it was for a wrapper script so that there would be no
> > difference of how the process appears in `ps` which some 3rd party scripts
> > uses to check whether the specific program is running.
> >
> > As a workaround I simply put the original executable in a subfolder and then
> > did a ´exec´, but with ´exec -a´ I could've simply renamed it. And the case
> > before that was similar but I can't remember exactly what it was for, I believe
> > it was some application which itself behaved differently depending on ´argv[0]´.
> >
>
> Any update on this? Yay or nay on my patch?
>
More information about the busybox
mailing list