GNU bug report logs -
#73405
wrap-program should use the basename of $0 as arg0
Previous Next
Full log
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi,
I believe wrap-program should be using
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
exec -a ${0##*/} ...
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
instead of
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
exec -a "$0" ...
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
as the later will use the full file name of the command
(/gnu/store/.../bin/something) instead of just the command name, which
is more conventional.
I made this discovery while investigating a segfault that occured in a
wrapped 'cling'; adjusting the wrapper script to read as:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#!/gnu/store/3jhfhxdf6v5ms10x5zmnl166dh3yhbr1-bash-minimal-5.1.16/bin/bash
exec -a ${0##*/} "/gnu/store/0ccm05058yjd5qi8hcdr70ymhf9q6cc2-cling-1.1/bin/.cling-real" "$@"
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
where the value of -a becomes 'cling' instead of its full file name
resolved the issue. The original wrapper reads like:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#!/gnu/store/3jhfhxdf6v5ms10x5zmnl166dh3yhbr1-bash-minimal-5.1.16/bin/bash
exec -a "$0" "/gnu/store/l8875yavr1nls7n3i3yx8ah0s1lasn43-cling-1.1/bin/.cling-real" "$@"
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
It's probably rare that this "problem" would manifest itself so
critically, but still, I think it'd be good to adjust our wrap-program
procedure. I'll send a patch.
--
Thanks,
Maxim
This bug report was last modified 62 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.