From: Bodo Eggert (7eggert_at_gmx.de)
Date: Tue 28 Dec 2004 - 12:33:37 GMT
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Enrico Scholz (enrico.scholz_at_informatik.tu-chemnitz.de) wrote:
> > * execve(2) is more efficiently than execvp(3)
> Is there something in here that actually would notice from such a
> change? Seriously, is there *really* some benefit here for an end user
> or is this just a lame excuse thrown in at the end?
There is a benefit, but it's not speed. Searching the PATH is less secure
than execve, and it can fail if there are stale binaries in the PATH (e.g.
-- Funny quotes: 36. You never really learn to swear until you learn to drive.
Friß, Spammer: service_at_fhdvsdsfwef.info order_at_pharmwholesale.com _______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver