From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8530 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2002 00:16:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8507 invoked by uid 71); 14 Aug 2002 00:16:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 18:01:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020814001601.8505.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Tom Tromey Subject: Re: libgcj/7568: Runtime.exec ignores directory argument Reply-To: Tom Tromey X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00275.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libgcj/7568; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Tom Tromey To: jmr@ugcs.caltech.edu Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: libgcj/7568: Runtime.exec ignores directory argument Date: 13 Aug 2002 18:09:09 -0600 >>>>> "Jesse" == Jesse Rosenstock writes: Jesse> Perhaps I'm missing something. If it were really this easy, it Jesse> would probably have been fixed before. No, it really is that easy. It's just that nobody has bothered to do the updates since Runtime was changed around. I think this patch is fine. I don't think there is any problem allocating memory in the child after a fork (with vfork there might be a problem, but we explicitly don't do that). I'm testing this and will check it in once it is done. I'm simultaneously putting in the PR 7570 patch. I think you've reached the limit of freebie patches :-(. After this, we'll have to get paperwork from you. Do you know about this process? (Maybe you already have the paperwork and I just don't know or have forgotten?) Thanks, Tom