Re: closing extra fd's in gnome_execute_*

[Manish Vachharajani <mvachhar vger rutgers edu>]

On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, George wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 09, 1999 at 01:55:46AM -0500, Manish Vachharajani wrote:
> > I have noticed a bug in bash when there are too many fd's around, it
> > crashes on certain operations. The thing is, many programs have this
> > problem.  They should all be fixed, but this isn't always practical.
> > 
> > Does anyone see a problem if we close all fd's except 0,1, and 2 in
> > gnome_execute_* or should we add a set of functions,
> > gnome_execute_(async|shell)_*_closing_fds and have programs use those
> > instead?  I assume breaking binary compatiblity by adding a parameter to
> > these functions is out of the question due to the code freeze, correct?
> 
> I guess you meant source compatibility ... anyway if the current way is

Hear what I mean not what I say :)

> Broke(tm) then this would constitute a bugfix ... it would be better to
> keep source compatibility and iron out the ugliness of the API later
> (after 1.0)

Well, the question is, does anyone expect any fd's besides 0, 1, or 2 to
be open after executing gnome_execute_*.  If not then we can just close
all the additional fd's before execing.  I am pretty certain this is the
behavior most people expect.  I am curious to know if there are any
exceptions.  If people want them open, I can go ahead and add the new
functions.

> George
> 

Manish Vachharajani               Some Haiku: A crash reduces
<mvachhar@vger.rutgers.edu>                   your expensive computer
                                              to a simple stone - Unknown