Re: [PATCH] core file naming option

[davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen)]

In article <3BB104A9.3AD512A5@inet.com>,
Eli Carter <eli.carter@inet.com> wrote:

| The attached patch adds an option to the build to have core files named
| core.processname, but defaulting to the current behaviour of course. 
| For most people the single 'core' file is sufficient, but when the sky
| is falling, it's nice to have more places for it to land.  :)
| So, is this something that might go into the kernel, or are their
| philisophical reasons against it?  (The patch is against 2.2.19.  I
| haven't looked at 2.4.x yet.  Let me know if you want a 2.4 or if I
| should send it to Linus, or...)
| 
| Questions, comments, etc. welcome,

  Since you asked for it... ;-)

  While you're adding this feature, and it seems others are adding
similar things, it is *highly* desirable to allow the build to put all
the dumps in one place of desired (my  first thought is /var/core) so
that if you get a lot you won't run the system out of disk.

  The directory name could be set in /proc/sys/coredir (or somesuch)
with an initial value of "." of course.

  Other than that I like the idea, although process "name" could get a
lot of clashes on threads, and pid gets reused. There may be a better
idea, but most of mine are cumbersome. This would really simplify
certain kinds of dump analysis.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
 "If I were a diplomat, in the best case I'd go hungry.  In the worst
  case, people would die."
		-- Robert Lipe