Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace

H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> I would like give a strong objection to the naming.  The -ve() suffix in
> execve() isn't jettisonable; it indicates its position within a family
> of functions (only one of which is a true system call.)
> 
> execven() would be better name (the -n argument coming after then -e
> argument).  The library could then provide execlen(), execlpn() etc as
> appropriate.

I agree. execns() is a shortcut.

This service behaves like execve() if the flag argument is 0, so I guess we
should keep the execve- prefix. However, we could be a bit more explicit on
the nature of this service and call it execve_unshare().

thanks,

C.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace
    • From: Cedric Le Goater <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace
    • From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Will there be Intel Wireless 3945ABG support?
• Next by Date: [PATCH 0/2] mm: measuring resource demand
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/7] execns syscall and user namespace
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]