home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:1034 biz.sco.general:5076
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!xenitec!news
- From: petri@cerebus.inter.fi (Petri Wessman)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,biz.sco.general
- Subject: Re: [SCO] execvp(2) seems to fail on shell scripts!
- Message-ID: <9301120823.AA32556@cerebus.inter.fi>
- Date: 12 Jan 93 08:23:58 GMT
- References: <PETRI.WESSMAN.93Jan11182858@lk-hp-21.hut.fi>
- <m0nBZ2q-0000SqC@flatlin.ka.sub.org>
- Sender: news@xenitec.on.ca (xenitec.on.ca News Administrator)
- Reply-To: Petri.Wessman@hut.fi
- Organization: [resent by] The SCOGEN gateway and Propagation Society
- Lines: 29
- Resent-From: mmdf@xenitec.on.ca
- Submit-To: scogen@xenitec.on.ca
- Precedence: bulk
-
- On Tue, 12 Jan 1993 00:59:00 +0100, bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org (Christoph Badura) said:
-
- [comments about our problems with exec & shell scripts deleted]
-
- Christoph> Since when does a vanilla V.3 system support #!-interpreter
- Christoph> execution? Did you check the exec(S) man page?
-
-
- Yes, I know that the man page doesn't mention scripts, and I also know
- that you have to explicitly enable #!-processing in the kernel config
- for it to work (we don't have it enabled, that *is* one idea to
- try...). This isn't a problem with #!-interpretation, as the scripts
- are Bourne shell scripts, which (as far as I know) is the default
- shell.
-
- We also tried to exec the scripts using by execing '/bin/sh -c
- scriptpath', it doesn't affect the problem in any way -- the system
- still goes into a no-scripts-executed state at some point.
-
- Also, exec(2) *does* know how to execute shell scripts directly ... it
- does it perfectly well for a long time. The thing is, it stops doing
- it at some point. What is the "official & correct" method under SCO
- the start up shell scripts from a program, BTW? Should you exec() it
- directly or via /bin/sh -c? Is there a difference? Not that it matters
- to our problem :-(
-
- It still looks like a kernel bug. Prove me wrong. Please. :-)
-
- //Petri
-