Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 17:09:00 +0400
From: Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
To: "Sean C. Farley" <scf@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Michal Mertl <mime@traveller.cz>
Subject: Re: Environment handling broken in /bin/sh with changes to {get,set,put}env()
Message-ID: <20070707130859.GA96605@nagual.pp.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20070705105922.F98700@thor.farley.org>
References: <20070704101026.O77978@thor.farley.org> <20070704173905.T67251@fledge.watson.org> <20070704121316.A77978@thor.farley.org> <20070704180000.GA34042@nagual.pp.ru> <20070704144159.X77978@thor.farley.org> <20070704195939.GA35302@nagual.pp.ru> <20070704235630.GA42227@nagual.pp.ru> <20070704215154.O77978@thor.farley.org> <20070705115816.GA50506@nagual.pp.ru> <20070705105922.F98700@thor.farley.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:38:53AM -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote: >> Previously the goal of veryfy_env() is just deactivate, the goal of >> build_env() is just build. It was build_env() who insetrts new environ >> variables into envVars array in old variant, isn't? > > Yes, it was. Now, it is to merge in a new environ array. I renamed it > __merge_environ() to better reflect its new role. Well, I see. You try to keep envVars[] between environ switch by that way. But it still look complicated and probably gains nothing. I.e. will be much _faster_ just free envVars[] (but not variables themselfs) and allow build_env() to calloc() new array for envVars and fills it from new environ. It is surely faster than calling setenv() for each variable just for sake of keepeng once allocated envVars[]. Moreover, environ switch commonly used to switch from large environ to smaller one (or to empty one), so the rest of old envVars[] array would keep unneccessary allocation. > The alternative, which I had actually considered, is to split setenv() > into __setenv() which is almost the entire current setenv() and a new > setenv() that is just a wrapper around __setenv() with the beginning > checks. This seems a bit of a waste, but I may be mistaken. Well, no recurse level increase problems but just slowdown. -- http://ache.pp.ru/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070707130859.GA96605>