From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Nov 25 18:33:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 821) id 0E8FF37B405; Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:33:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 18:33:45 -0800 From: "John W. De Boskey" To: Arch List Subject: Comments on kern/32106 (MAXSHELLCMDLEN increase) Message-ID: <20011125183344.A1257@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/32106 This pr seems particulary straight forward. However, I believe the real problem lies in libc/gen/exec.c and it's handling of the ENOEXEC errno being returned from exec_shell_imgact(). ENOEXEC as a return code appears to be overloaded. A quick review of the code leads me to believe that exec_shell_imgact() could/should return E2BIG which is handled correctly in execvp() by dropping through to the done label and returning -1 (ie: the interpreter path is too big). As to the pr submitters original request, I do not see any earth shattering reasons why MAXSHELLCMDLEN can't be increased (if only to 128 and not 512). Comments? -john To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message