home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: llunch@knuth.cba.csuohio.edu (Jason Baker)
- Subject: Re: MiNT 1.10 re-sync
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 1994 10:41:13 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <21452.9406170657@elvis.earth.ox.ac.uk> from "Stephen Usher" at Jun 17, 94 07:57:20 am
-
- >
- > >Michael Hohmuth writes:
- > >
- > >> > 6. and now the sticky text/fragmentation megapatch... does a few things:
- > >>
- > >> > . execv..() frees the old process memory before allocating the new ones,
- > >> > and so no longer leaves holes in your memory map. this took a few
- > >> > ugly hacks but i think its worth it :) the only visible change should
- > >> > be when exec'ing a damaged binary the process gets killed, fixing that
- > >> > would require reading executables twice.
- > >>
- > >> Well, that's fine with me, but I don't know whether this "non-posixish"
- > >> behaviour is tolerable by all others? I guess so... as it effectively
- > >> makes "damaged executable" equivalent to "executable crashed immediately
- > >> after it has been run".
- >
- I don't know how shells actually handle interpreter files, but
- one way would be to do an exec..(), and if it has an invalid format
- check if it should be piped to an interpreter.
-
- Jason
-
-