Re: Find argument passed to running process
Re: Find argument passed to running process
- Subject: Re: Find argument passed to running process
- From: Terry Lambert <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:48:47 -0700
On Sep 3, 2009, at 3:14 AM, Nico Schmidt <email@hidden> wrote:
On 03.09.2009, at 05:11, Michael Smith wrote:
On the subject of procfs; folks, you are trying to solve the wrong
problem. Adding another access method absent a sensible schema
does nothing to address the basic problem.
How would you address the basic problem?
I actually do not see a statement of the problem you are attempting to
solve, beyond "I don't have an API for XYZ". Unless you have a
specific, concrete application in mind for the API you are requesting,
you are just asking people other than yourself to do work because you
might need an API for XYZ some day.
FWIW: My personal approach has always been to not need to ask the
system for the information in the first place, because I already have
it.
The justification for a detailed synchronus arbitrary process status
API that won't change for the next decade generally boils down to one
of the following:
(1) the information is for status reporting; solution: wrap a system
utility like ps
(2) the information is something the process being inspected wants
published; solution: so have the process publish it, either
procedurally via IPC or in /var/run
(3) the information is something the parent wants published about one
of its children; solution: the parent can publish it (see #2)
(4) the information is something the parent needs later; solution:
remember it, you're the one who started the process in the first
place... you don't need an API just because you are too lazy to
remember it
(5) the information is not security sensitive, and some process would
like to have it because it's overly nosy; solution: either quit being
nosy or use a system tool (see #1), or use public self/parent
published information if it exists (see #2)
(6) the information is security sensitive, and some privileged process
would like to have it because it's overly nosy (see #5; trust the
tools to recognize privilege)
(7) the information is security sensitive, and some unprivileged
process would like to have it because it's overly nosy; solution:
obtain privilege legitimately (see #6), or go away empty handed
because leaving you empty handed was a design goal (behaves correctly)
-- Terry
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden