[lttng-dev] [lttng-tools PATCH v2 1/4] Always add the executable name to consumerd32/64_path

[Yannick Brosseau]

On 2011-12-05 13:41, David Goulet wrote:
>
> On 11-12-05 01:33 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> * Alexandre Montplaisir (alexandre.montplaisir at gmail.com) wrote:
>>> The handling of the "consumerd32_path" and "consumerd64_path" was
>>> lacking consistency ; in some cases it would include the filename
>>> "lttng-consumerd" at the end, in some others it would not.
>>>
>>> What is proposed here is to consider the configure options and
>>> environment variables as real "paths", so the user would never have
>>> to specify filenames ("lttng-consumerd" is assumed). However in
>>> the program itself we'll append the filename, so we can easily
>>> test for its existence and run exec(consumer_path, ...)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Montplaisir<alexandre.montplaisir at gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>   lttng-sessiond/main.c |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>   1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lttng-sessiond/main.c b/lttng-sessiond/main.c
>>> index fcae023..77f86ae 100644
>>> --- a/lttng-sessiond/main.c
>>> +++ b/lttng-sessiond/main.c
>>> @@ -184,6 +184,7 @@ static
>>>   void setup_consumerd_path(void)
>>>   {
>>>   	const char *path, *libdir;
>>> +	int ret;
>>>
>>>   	/*
>>>   	 * Allow INSTALL_BIN_PATH to be used as a target path for the
>>> @@ -213,20 +214,39 @@ void setup_consumerd_path(void)
>>>   	 */
>>>   	path = getenv("LTTNG_CONSUMERD32_PATH");
>>>   	if (path) {
>>> -		consumerd32_path = path;
>>> +		ret = asprintf((char**)&consumerd32_path, "%s/" CONSUMERD_FILE, path);
>> This cast tells me something is wrong. I'll let David reply.
>>
> Well... actually, I know it's wrong but the other way around is to use a "tmp"
> var and after that consumerd32_path = tmp... which is basically the same.
> However, for the sake of the "uglyness" of cast... I don't know, it does not
> shock me that much. Mathieu, what's your feeling about that?
>

I agree that the cast is quite ugly. At least, there should be a comment 
describing why we are casting here.

Using the tmp variable might make this code clearer...

Yannick