From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FyiEF-0000Cs-Rx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 04:46:12 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k674ie1p009027; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 04:44:40 GMT Received: from mail.netspace.net.au (thunder.netspace.net.au [203.10.110.71]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k674aP7B015210 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 04:36:26 GMT Received: from [192.168.1.52] (ppp246-231.static.internode.on.net [203.122.246.231]) by mail.netspace.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11E54BE5E for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 14:36:22 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] OT: get process name in c++ From: Iain Buchanan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <7573e9640607061955y578b654djd96558656aa59fca@mail.gmail.com> References: <1151499883.17966.13.camel@orpheus> <200606281551.42342.petr.uzel@centrum.cz> <200606281601.07029.petr.uzel@centrum.cz> <1151542067.19231.0.camel@orpheus> <1152239843.31828.0.camel@orpheus> <7573e9640607061955y578b654djd96558656aa59fca@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 14:05:45 +0930 Message-Id: <1152246945.31828.3.camel@orpheus> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: dd1b6a41-e203-4e03-87d8-9f8ef1d3caeb X-Archives-Hash: e88206b2871f3f80694e9f7132d949ce On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 19:55 -0700, Richard Fish wrote: > On 7/6/06, Iain Buchanan wrote: > > Someone mentioned that /proc is deprecated for 2.6? is this correct? Is > > there a /sys alternative to /proc/self/status? > > Again, I *highly* suggest doing the standard, cross-platform, and > most-efficient thing, which is to just store off the argv[0] pointer > to a global variable. yes I would, except that I'm editing a class which is inherited by a multitude of programs, so the /proc way I only have to change one file, whereas the argv[0] way I have to change every source file... but suggestion noted :) -- Iain Buchanan Ctrl+Option+Command + P + R dracus - YE GODS! That's worse than EMACS! hehehehe don't ask what that does :P -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list