From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29239 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2008 22:37:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 29230 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Mar 2008 22:37:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from heller.inter.net.il (HELO heller.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:36:41 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-207-15.inter.net.il [84.229.207.15]) by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id FGM36665 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:36:36 +0200 (IST) Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:59:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20080309211329.GB26503@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:13:29 -0400) Subject: Re: info proc cmd Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20080309211329.GB26503@caradoc.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 17:13:29 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com > > I thought at first you meant "info proc cmd" literally, Actually, I did. (I looked in the sources, and it mentions "cmd" explicitly.) > so I tried it, and it behaved just like info proc :-) That's because cmdline_f, cwd_f, and exe_f are ON by default, so mentioning them as part of "info proc" has no effect. > > This bug is easy enough to fix, but I wonder whether some older > > versions of Linux did use the one-string format, in which case fixing > > this to assume a set of null-terminated arguments would break those > > old systems. > > > > Does anyone has further insight into the history of this? Should I > > just go ahead and fix the code? > > I think you can go ahead and fix it; it's been NUL separated for as > long as I can remember. Will do. Thanks for the feedback.