Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!uhccux!quonset.cfht.hawaii.edu!john
From: john@quonset.cfht.hawaii.edu (John Kerr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: RE: Motif and xdb problem
Message-ID: <9494@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Date: 21 Sep 90 19:31:59 GMT
References: <430024@hpnmdla.HP.COM> <9474@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Sender: news@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu
Reply-To: john@quonset.cfht.hawaii.edu (John Kerr)
Organization: Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Corp.
Lines: 23

Thanks to all that responded, but only one person responded
correctly.   The problem I was looking to resolve did not
have anything to do with running xdb (in other words, not operator
error).  I know about signals and the effects on debuggers.  What
was puzzling was that I was NOT forking any children.  My question really
was -- If I did not fork some process, then WHO DID?

The culprit lies hidden in XmFileSelectionBox.  Upon examining the trace
of execution, I see that getcwd() is invoked by XmFileSelectionBox...
This is the nasty little guy that forks off a process.  In fact there
is no mention of signals in getcwd(3C).  Seems to me that this could
be a really bad snare in certain applications.  Why does getcwd
need to do this?  Is it execing a shell to do a 'pwd'????

Anyway, 'nuff already.  The side effects are minimal, the sun still
rises in the east, so, to heck with it and back to work.


 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 John Kerr                      Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Corp.
                                INTERNET: john@cfht.hawaii.edu 
                                BITNET:   john@uhcfht
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------