[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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 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 format to dump the core for each thread (probably a bad idea).


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.078 / U:0.708 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site