On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf@...> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Timothy Pearson >> <kb9vqf@...> wrote: >>>> On 2 March 2012 09:17, Aleksey Midenkov <midenok@...> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Darrell Anderson >>>>> <humanreadable@...> wrote: >>>>>> This message is from tdelibs/kinit/kinit.cpp. They appear in the >>>>>> xession log. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't mind the messages and I can see from the source code they are >>>>>> intended to be debugging aids. >>>>>> >>>>>> But they lack information. How do I add the process name to the >>>>>> message? >>>>>> >>>>>> Like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> PID 10804 (process name) terminated. >>>>>> >>>>>> With that information the message might remain useful only for >>>>>> debugging, but at least the message appears more useful and >>>>>> informational to users. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You can consult /proc/<PID>/cmdline contents. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yeah this is the way to do it - but it's not portable is it? >>>> >>>> Calvin >>> >>> Use an #ifdef for POSIX systems to enable extra information from >>> /proc/<PID>, and keep the original code for non-POSIX systems. This >>> type >>> of code is present in a few places in tdelibs already. >>> >> >> To be strict, this is not POSIX standard. Therefore such check does >> not guarantee procfs presence. And vice versa: procfs presence does >> not require POSIX compliance. So, I'm not sure if such check is >> correct. Better look at the sources. >> >> And, AFAIK, POSIX does not cover process table info at all. So, on >> Linux this is the only way. IMHO. > > Correct, I was typing too fast and wrote the wrong thing; my apologies. > As far as I can tell no other mainstream POSIX-compliant system provides > /proc/<PID> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procfs) There is some other > unguarded TDE code that will probably fail to function on FreeBSD and > other non-Linux systems; this code should be found (e.g. via grep) and > guarded. > > I know a prototype guard check for Linux is present in at least one of the > kioslaves, as I have seen it before... And reading from /proc of course should be non-fatal where it is not critical. I've just checked ps under chroot where proc is not mounted. It says: Cannot find /proc/version - is /proc mounted? This is the way of checking it.