addr2line and the name of the executable

Wed Feb 19 16:48:00 GMT 2003

Mohan Embar writes:
 > Andrew> gnu.gcj.prognamegnu.gcj.progname should probably be argv[0], unmangled by anuything.
 > 
 > That would mean that my patch would have _Jv_ThisExecutable() potentially
 > return something different than gnu.gcj.progname.
Yes. Definitely. We shouldn't intermix the implementation of
gnu.gcj.progname and argv[0]; they have completely different purposes.
 > Would we then need a gnu.gcj.exename to put _Jv_ThisExecutable on
 > equal footing with argv[0]?
No, I don't think so. The only time we ever need a real hard path to
the excutable is for the stack trace code, which calls
_Jv_ThisExecutable directly. _Jv_ThisExecutable works perfectly for
the job it was desgined to do, so we should not change it. 
The only problem which remains is to set gnu.gcj.progname from
argv[0]. Perhaps we could save argv at startup so that properties
initialization can see it.
Andrew.