Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:07:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:07:11 -0500 Received: from [66.150.46.254] ([66.150.46.254]:1581 "EHLO mail.tvol.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:06:51 -0500 Message-ID: <3C6CF9D5.7417A8F@wgate.com> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:06:45 -0500 From: Michael Sinz Organization: WorldGate Communications Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.5-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakob =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8stergaard?= CC: Linux Kernel List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Core dump file control In-Reply-To: <3C6BE18F.7B849129@wgate.com> <20020215124036.C23673@unthought.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jakob ?stergaard wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 11:10:55AM -0500, Michael Sinz wrote: > > I have, for a long time, wished that Linux had a way to specify where > > core dumps are stored and what the name of the core dump is. Now that > > I have been building large linux clusters with many diskless nodes, > > this need has become even more important. > ... > > I just wanted to throw in my 0.02 Euro on this one: > > I have not yet tested your patch yet - but this functionality is *very* > important to my company as well. > > Anyone developing applications with multiple processes will benefit > significantly from having core files named differnetly than just "core". That was my first need (%N.core is what I used on a different platform) However, being able to specify a few more items really provides much more flexibility. > A patch was included in the kernel some time ago, to allow the appending of the > PID - however, this is not really good enough. It's better than nothing, but > it's not good. > > What I want is "core.[process name]" eventually with a ".[pid]" appended. A > flexible scheme like your patch implements is very nice. Actually having > the core files in CWD is fine for me - I mainly care about the file name. > > Furthermore, the patch that went in earlier is *horrible* code. Let me give a > few examples: I had noticed that - it was rather poor - and rather strange. I hope people like my patch a bit better. -- Michael Sinz ---- Worldgate Communications ---- msinz@wgate.com A master's secrets are only as good as the master's ability to explain them to others. - 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/