addr2line and the name of the executable

Tue Feb 25 15:45:00 GMT 2003

> > 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.

I'm running into a small snag with this. If we want gnu.gcj.progname
always equal to argv[0], then this behavior is inconsistent with the
current implementation today: because today if HAVE_PROC_SELF_EXE is
defined, then gnu.gcj.progname becomes /proc/XXX/exe. I don't see why
gnu.gcj.progname is allowed to be /proc/XXX/exe in the case of
HAVE_PROC_SELF_EXE, but not the full path to the executable in the
case of Win32. Semantically, argv[0] and the full path to the executable
are the same in the case of Win32, and given that gnu.gcj.progname is
allowed to be something other than argv[0] in one already-existing
current implementation, I don't see the harm in allowing it to be
something different (albeit way more semantically equivalent than
/proc/XXX/exe) in Win32 also.
May I have:
gnu.gcj.progname = _Jv_ThisExecutable() = whatever the implementation chooses?
-- Mohan
http://www.thisiscool.com/
http://www.animalsong.org/