Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!agate!root
From: root@agate.berkeley.edu (Charlie Root)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: executable scripts?, and retraction of bovine exhaust
Summary: How about hacking exec(RTL) instead of kernel
Message-ID: <1991May3.160208.18011@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 3 May 91 16:02:08 GMT
References: <10120@plains.NoDak.edu>
Organization: Center for Particle Astrophysics, UC Berkeley
Lines: 36

In article <10120@plains.NoDak.edu> overby@plains.NoDak.edu (Glen Overby) writes (in part):
>I disagree.  The shell should not be looking at executables; it should
>merely "exec" them and the kernel should determine what is REALLY done with
>the executable, be it loaded as a binary image or fed through an interpreter.
>
>By requiring the "shell" to check for executable scripts, you complicate any
>program which chooses to use exec(2) since it, too, must open the executable
>and check for an interpreter.  Any executable should be "exec"-able.

I see a third alternative.  You could hack exec in the run-time
library to do the check.  This avoids the above objection, that any
program should be able to exec executables, since I presume most
programs call the RTL exec when they want to exec something.  (One
that didn't would make a great entry in the IOCCC though...)  And
putting the change in the RTL follows the grand principle of moving
policy to the highest convenient location.

Just a suggestion.

And on a separate topic, my recent diatribe here about the evils of
software patents contained one item that is apparently misinformation,
i.e. bullshit.  Among the ludicrous patents I listed was a patent on
the include file.  I got a message asking for more info on this, and
after some effort I find that I still have no info on it, leading me
to conclude that there is no such patent.  I regret having propagated
this rumor.  However, the other ludicrous patents I listed and the
dangers of this system are very real.  I urge all of you to read the
LPF position papers, which can be obtained by anonymous FTP from
prep.ai.mit.edu:/pub/lpf, or I will mail a copy on request.  And I
urge those of you in the US to consider joining the LPF, which is
engaging in lobbying efforts to eliminate software patents and
look-and-feel copyrights in the US.

Dave Cottingham			| "The low-bid contractor is not always
dc@caveat.berkeley.edu		|  the truly socially conscious one."
				| - Loni Hancock, mayor of Berkeley