On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 02:33:41PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > Aside: I started looking because POSIX is adding a "chdir" file action > to posix_spawn and posix_spawnp - and the path search (for relative paths) > done by posix_spawnp is to be applied after the effects of the chdir, which > would mean changes to our code. They're also adding a fchdir() file action, > which my initial impression was would be impossible to support in > posix_spawnp() (no reliable way to find the name for the directory so as to > test 'x' permission on the potential pathnames generated from a PATH element > lookup relative to that directpory) - but now I think there might be a > way. Anyway, that caused me to look at our posix_spawnp() implementation > leading to the discovery of this disparity between the doc and the code.
We have a summer of code project that can cover this part. Joerg
