Re: exec [was Re: POSIX compliance [RE: Another package ported]]

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

Paul Emsley <paule@chem.gla.ac.uk> writes:

>         How about exec? Olin Shivers writes:
> 
>         "Unfortunately, the Unix exec(2) syscall's support for scripts
>       is not very general or well-designed.  It will not handle
>       multiple arguments; the #! line is usually required to contain
>       no more than 32 characters; it is not recursive.  If these
>       restrictions are violated, most Unix systems will not provide
>       accurate error reporting, but either fail silently, or simply
>       incorrectly implement the desired function.  These are the facts
>       of Unix life".
> 
>         Are they the facts of GNU life too?

Multiple arguments: We are forced to implement the Unix lossage here
in order to preserve compatibility.

We do not have a line length limitation.

I think we are perfectly able to handle #! recursion, though it would
be useful if someone could check.

As for accurate error reporting, there's not much more you can do than
return ENOENT or ENOEXEC or some such code.  Alas, those are the
perils of Unixoid interfaces.

Thomas