Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:30:25 +0100 | From | Padraig Brady <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] core file naming option |
| |
Eli Carter wrote:
>Alan et. all, > >The attached patch adds an option to the build to have core files named >core.processname, but defaulting to the current behaviour of course. >For most people the single 'core' file is sufficient, but when the sky >is falling, it's nice to have more places for it to land. :) >So, is this something that might go into the kernel, or are their >philisophical reasons against it? (The patch is against 2.2.19. I >haven't looked at 2.4.x yet. Let me know if you want a 2.4 or if I >should send it to Linus, or...) > >Questions, comments, etc. welcome, > Other Unix' have used core.pid as the name. Wouldn't this be better? Especially when the process name is already stored in a core file (`file core` will give you this). Hmm I wonder could we use this core.pid format to dump the core for each thread (probably a bad idea).
Padraig.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |