* Thomas Stüfe: > Since we deal with many libc variants, not only glibc, fixing > posix_spawn just in glibc may not be sufficient, at least not for a > long time.
I think Solaris already has the required functionality, so it's not entirely glibc-specific. > But if you would fix glibc and give it a error-reporting back channel > for exec() this would already help a lot. I dug up > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18433 which sounded > pretty hopeless. Well, this one at least is fixed. But it will take some time to propagate to distributions, of course. If an issue really bugs you, it might help to open backport requests with distribution maintainers. > I have long given up trying to report bugs to glibc maintainers :( Sorry to hear that. I think there's value in actually fixing the buggy component, and not working around breakage elsewhere. Thanks, Florian
