"Dmitry V. Levin" <l...@altlinux.org> writes: > Why should we pretend that execve/execveat don't return if they actually > do return?
If execve() succeeds, the calling image no longer exists... what does it return *to* ? The man page even says: "execve() does not return on success," Hence the philosophical question - does the user *expect* to see "= 0" in the trace when execve succeeds, or not? Where in any of the traced programs is that "= 0" available for inspection? (the fact that it returns and has a return value when it *fails* is not in question here) (and the fact that we *can* find something that *may* be a return value, is separate from whether or not we *should* print a return value, too) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
