From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Detecting glibc getopt? |
Date: | 2001-11-07 03:25:57 |
Message-ID: | 200111070325.fA73PvS20650@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Is this resolved?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I have traced down the postmaster-option-processing failure that Thomas
> reported this morning. It appears to be specific to systems running
> glibc: the problem is that resetting optind to 1 is not enough to
> put glibc's getopt() subroutine into a good state to process a fresh
> set of options. (Internally it has a "nextchar" pointer that is still
> pointing at the old argv list, and only if the pointer points to a null
> character will it wake up enough to reexamine the argv pointer you give
> it.) The reason we see this now, and didn't see it before, is that
> I rearranged startup to set the ps process title as soon as possible
> after forking a subprocess --- and at least on Linux machines, that
> "nextchar" pointer is pointing into the argv array that's overwritten
> by init_ps_display.
>
> While I could revert that change, I don't want to. The idea was to be
> sure that a postmaster child running its authentication cycle could be
> identified, and I still think that's an important feature. So I want to
> find a way to make it work.
>
> Looking at the source code of glibc's getopt, it seems there are two
> ways to force a reset:
>
> * set __getopt_initialized to 0. I thought this was an ideal solution
> since configure could check for the presence of __getopt_initialized.
> Unfortunately it seems that glibc is built in such a way that that
> symbol isn't exported :-(, even though it looks global in the source.
>
> * set optind to 0, instead of the more usual 1. This will work, but
> it requires us to know that we're dealing with glibc getopt and not
> anyone else's getopt.
>
> I have thought of two ways to detect glibc getopt: one is to assume that
> if getopt_long() is available, we should set optind=0. The other is to
> try a runtime test in configure and see if it works to set optind=0.
> Runtime configure tests aren't very appealing, but I don't much care
> for equating HAVE_GETOPT_LONG to how we should reset optind, either.
>
> Opinions anyone? Better ideas?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2001-11-07 03:40:34 | Re: Detecting glibc getopt? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-11-07 03:10:56 | Re: NLS HISTORY.patch.txt |