oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly

From: "Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM)" <lyndon () orthanc ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2022 16:44:49 -0800

Dominique Martinet writes:

But, really, I just don't see how this can practically be said to be parsable...


In its current form it never will be.  The solution is to place
this variable-length field last.  Then you can "cut -d ' ' -f 51-"
to get the command+args part (assuming I counted all those fields
correctly ...)

Of course, this breaks backwards compatability.

--lyndon

Current thread:

[patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Alexey Dobriyan (Dec 22)
- Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Dominique Martinet (Dec 22)
  - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Solar Designer (Dec 22)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Dominique Martinet (Dec 22)
  - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Jan Engelhardt (Dec 22)
  - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Shawn Webb (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Shawn Webb (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Demi Marie Obenour (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Jan Engelhardt (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Shawn Webb (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Demi Marie Obenour (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly John Helmert III (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Shawn Webb (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Alejandro Colomar (Dec 28)
    - Re: [patch] proc.5: tell how to parse /proc/*/stat correctly Theodore Ts'o (Dec 29)

(Thread continues...)