On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> Jakob Østergaard wrote:
...
> >
> >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.
> >
>
> Please execute the size command on the core fiel:
>
> size core
>
> to see why this isn't needed.
>
Huh ?
I suppose you mean, that I can get the name of the executable that caused the
core dump, when running size - right ?
Well, you can do that easier with the file command.
But that doesn't prevent my 7 other processes from overwriting the core file
of the 8'th process which was the first one to crash. Multi-process systems
can, on occation, produce such "domino dumps". Separate names is a *must have*.
And having process names is nicer than having PIDs - I don't mind if my core
files are over-written on subsequent runs, actually it's nice (keeps the disks
from filling up).
--
................................................................
: jakob@unthought.net : And I see the elder races, :
:.........................: putrid forms of man :
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
: OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:01:07 EST