Hi! On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 03:30:41PM +0100, Julian Reschke wrote: > However, for those who use extensions, the process names now would > contain the extensions as well. I'm not convinced that this is what > people want... That's exactly what I pointed out as a problem with not stopping at the first dot for names in U:\proc. Just a heuristic that strips the common GEM extensions would work, but of course it's sort of a workaround, and not a real solution. > And this would only work if ARGV parameter passing was actually used... Of course, but if not, it would still be possible to use the path passed to Pexec() as a "fallback". IMO, it would be possible to offer both values via the Fcntl()-interface, perhaps using a new opcode. Besides, having called the existing one "PLOADINFO" is a bit misleading, at least I expect something different from that name ;) Ciao Thomas -- Thomas Binder (Gryf @ IRCNet) gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de PGP-key available on request! binder@rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
Attachment:
pgp6v_yJUf_Q_.pgp
Description: PGP signature