Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <006f01bfeeea$ac86da20$f7c723cb@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
References: <004801bfeed8$5a75f610$f7c723cb AT lifelesswks> <20000715234510 DOT A8476 AT cygnus DOT com> <005c01bfeede$10604c00$f7c723cb AT lifelesswks> <20000716003824 DOT A8880 AT cygnus DOT com> <006401bfeee6$24ba9680$f7c723cb AT lifelesswks> <20000716013341 DOT A9284 AT cygnus DOT com>
Subject: Re: two questions
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 15:57:01 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700

The output was very similar yes.
Is there any chance you could post the patch? Or mail it to me?

Thanks
Rob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Faylor" <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
To: <cygwin-apps AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2000 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: two questions


> On Sun, Jul 16, 2000 at 03:24:35PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >This sample program demonstrates the problem. I am using execvp for my my
> >code, by exec() I actually meant the exec family of calls... I'll try to
be
> >clearer next time..
> >
> >#include <stdio.h>
> >
> >int
> >main (int argc, char **argv)
> >{
> >  char *prog;
> >  char passarg[]="A";
> >  fprintf (stderr, "argv[0] '%s', argv[1] '%s'\n", argv[0], argv[1]);
> >  prog=(char *)strdup(argv[0]);
> >  if (argv[1]==NULL)
> >  {
> >    fprintf(stderr, "called with no args going to run '%s' with '%s'
> >\n",prog,passarg);
> >    sleep(5);
> >    execl (prog,prog,passarg );
> >    /* SHOULD NEVER REACH */
> >    fprintf(stderr, "exec failed!\n");
> >    sleep(10);
> >    }
> >  sleep(10);
> >}
>
> Both of our test programs had bugs in them.  Mine would core dump if
> there was more than one argument.  Yours SEGVs every time for me, although
> it could also just SEGV randomly, I suppose.
>
> The reason is that execl needs to be terminated with a NULL final
> argument.
>
> Regardless, my analysis of what was going wrong is still probably
> correct.  You didn't report on the output of any of the test
> cases but I would guess that, when run from explorer, you'd see
> something like:
>
> argv[0] '"c:\cygwin\usr\local\pathtest\pathtest"', argv[1] '(null)'
>         ^^                                     ^^
>
> The extra levels of quoting are what was screwing up cygwin.  As
> I mentioned, I just checked in a patch to fix this.
>
> cgf
>