On Mon, 27 Dec 2004, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Enrico Scholz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > * execve(2) is more efficiently than execvp(3) > > Is there something in here that actually would notice from such a > change? Seriously, is there *really* some benefit here for an end user > or is this just a lame excuse thrown in at the end? There is a benefit, but it's not speed. Searching the PATH is less secure than execve, and it can fail if there are stale binaries in the PATH (e.g. in /usr/local/bin) -- Funny quotes: 36. You never really learn to swear until you learn to drive. Fri�, Spammer: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [email protected] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
