Hi Linus,
On Tue, 16 May 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> >
> > I think the logic here would be more like:
> >
> > 1. During prepare_shell_cmd(), even if we optimize out the shell call,
> > still prepare a fallback argv (since we can't allocate memory
> > post-fork).
> >
> > 2. In the forked child, if we get ENOENT from exec and cmd->use_shell
> > is set, then exec the fallback shell argv instead. Propagate its
> > results, even if it's 127.
> >
> > That still means we'd prefer a $PATH copy of a command to its shell
> > builtin variant, but that can't be helped (and I kind of doubt anybody
> > would care too much).
>
> I think it would be better to just
>
> (a) get rid of the magic strcspn() entirely
>
> (b) make the 'can we optimize this' test be simply just looking up
> 'argv[0]' in $PATH
What about
ABC=1 my-executable my-arg
Ciao,
Dscho
