[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] core file naming option
In article <>,
Eli Carter <> wrote:

| 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,

Since you asked for it... ;-)

While you're adding this feature, and it seems others are adding
similar things, it is *highly* desirable to allow the build to put all
the dumps in one place of desired (my first thought is /var/core) so
that if you get a lot you won't run the system out of disk.

The directory name could be set in /proc/sys/coredir (or somesuch)
with an initial value of "." of course.

Other than that I like the idea, although process "name" could get a
lot of clashes on threads, and pid gets reused. There may be a better
idea, but most of mine are cumbersome. This would really simplify
certain kinds of dump analysis.

bill davidsen <>
"If I were a diplomat, in the best case I'd go hungry. In the worst
case, people would die."
-- Robert Lipe
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:0.054 / U:3.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site