Re: [Fwd: Debugging execve problems]

[Samuel Thibault]

Svante Signell, le Sun 08 Jan 2012 16:26:35 +0100, a écrit :
> On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 20:40 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le Sat 07 Jan 2012 20:05:45 +0100, a écrit :
> > > On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 18:48 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > Svante Signell, le Sat 07 Jan 2012 17:58:31 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > > On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 15:48 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > > > Svante Signell, le Sat 07 Jan 2012 15:43:46 +0100, a écrit :
> > > ...
> > > > I'm not talking about Linux, but about GNU/Hurd. When run from
> > > > execv, $0 in a shell script in hurd will be /dev/fd/3, not
> > > > e.g. $PWD/script.sh. Try the source code I had pasted in my mail, you'll
> > > > see.
> > > 
> > > I ran the code you posted (and on the ML) on GNU/Linux, and will do the
> > > same for GNU/Hurd! It still does not explain how having . in $PATH
> > > solves the problem.
> > 
> > It solves because in that case exec finds it in PATH.
> 
> Since the environment PATH is available to the exec server, what about
> PWD?

PWD is actually not an environment variable.

> If that is the case the exec server could search for the shell
> script along $PWD. (or is $CWD needed?) Are there any security or other
> issues involved here?

There are other issues, see Emilio's mails.

Samuel