[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: debugging guile runtime
From: |
rixed |
Subject: |
Re: debugging guile runtime |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:25:27 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
-[ Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 05:55:22PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès ]----
> Like in C, it???s up to the application to close those ports that it
> considers worth closing upon exec.
I was under the impression that the idiom was to close all files before
execing a coprocess, but I just checked POSIX popen, R.Stevens and libslack
and none does that. Well, the lib I'm used to does that and it felt
natural to do so that I erroneously assumed it was a mandated behavior
(so that running a coprocess is similar to running a program from a
shell).
OK then, so it's not a bug and I have to live with this behavior
(BTW, if anyone knows the rational behind this, I would be glad to
know).
> If what you want is to close every FD from 3 to ???, then the typical way
> to do this is to loop over those numbers and call close(2) (that???s how
> libdaemon and similar tools do that.)
Except that, as previously discussed in another thread, there is no easy
way to do that between the fork and the exec (since I don't want to
actually close these files in the main program that starts the pipe).
Anyway, what about the other bugs?
Is there anything I could do to advance the thread-safety issue for instance?
- debugging guile runtime, rixed, 2011/08/29
- Re: debugging guile runtime, Nala Ginrut, 2011/08/29
- Re: debugging guile runtime, rixed, 2011/08/29
- Re: debugging guile runtime, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2011/08/29
- Re: debugging guile runtime, rixed, 2011/08/30
- Re: debugging guile runtime, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/08/30
- Re: debugging guile runtime,
rixed <=
- Re: debugging guile runtime, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/08/30
- Re: debugging guile runtime, rixed, 2011/08/31
- Re: debugging guile runtime, Andy Wingo, 2011/08/31
Re: debugging guile runtime, Andy Wingo, 2011/08/31