This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: "J.C. Pizarro" <jcpiza at gmail dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:39:33 +0100
Subject: Re: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.
References: <998d0e4a0711281611g2b008c4awb5510789274ffbc8@mail.gmail.com> <017001c83297$a4846650$2e08a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> <998d0e4a0711290719v46a7c0dcgd573cefef284dda4@mail.gmail.com>

The more easy specification will be

int execel(const char *path, const char *arg0, char *const envp[],
                ... /*, (char *)0*/);

with same functionality but reordered the parameters of the function
following the general pattern of putting '...' in the last position.

Don't blame gcc developers (whose mailing list this is, unless something changed recently and I wasn't warned); take the discussion in the appropriate places and they'll care to explain you the reasons (maybe).

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.
  - From: Michael Meissner

References:
- Re: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.
  - From: J.C. Pizarro
- RE: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: Bug in builtins.def, the execve. don't use execle, use execel.
  - From: J.C. Pizarro

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]