Block same instance of a program for running again











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I am implementing a library (Linux) and I created some functions to block new instances of a running program and I was wonder if there are some better improvements for it.



Here is a program which describes what I am trying:



#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

#define SECONDS 20

static char *program_path = NULL;

char *my_strtok ( char *const msg, const char *const ch );
void block_new_instance ( const char *const instance );
void clean_instance ( void );

int main ( int argc, char *argv )
{
if ( argc != 1 )
{
printf( "nt*** Arguments are NOT allowed. ***n" );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

block_new_instance( argv[ 0 ] );
sleep( SECONDS );
}

void block_new_instance( const char *const instance )
{
char prog_name[ strlen( instance ) + 1 ];
memset( prog_name, '', sizeof( prog_name ) );
strcpy( prog_name, instance );
char *buffer = my_strtok( prog_name, "/" );
struct flock file_lock;
char *dir = getenv( "HOME" );

if ( dir == NULL || dir[0] != '/' )
{
fprintf( stderr, "Wrong Directory, getenv(): %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

program_path = calloc( sizeof ( *program_path ), strlen( dir ) + ( strlen( buffer ) + sizeof ( "/" ) ) );
if ( program_path == NULL )
{
printf( "Error, malloc()n" );
exit ( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

memcpy( program_path, dir, strlen( dir ) );
memcpy( program_path + strlen( dir ), "/", sizeof( "/") );
memcpy( program_path + ( strlen( dir ) + strlen( "/" ) ), buffer, strlen( buffer ) );

int file_desk = open( program_path, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0600 );
if ( file_desk < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "open: %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

file_lock.l_start = 0;
file_lock.l_len = 0;
file_lock.l_type = F_WRLCK;
file_lock.l_whence = SEEK_SET;

if ( fcntl( file_desk, F_SETLK, &file_lock ) < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "%s is already runningn", buffer );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}
atexit( clean_instance );
}

char *my_strtok( char *const msg, const char *const ch )
{
char *ret = NULL;
char *tmp = strtok( msg, ch );
while ( tmp != NULL )
{
ret = tmp;
tmp = strtok( NULL, ch );
}

if ( ret == NULL )
{
return NULL;
}
return ret;
}

void clean_instance( void )
{
unlink ( program_path );
free ( program_path );
}


Possible Outputs are:




*** Arguments are NOT allowed. **




or:




Program is already running




I would like to know which improvements are needed?










share|improve this question







New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
    – Mast
    2 hours ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I am implementing a library (Linux) and I created some functions to block new instances of a running program and I was wonder if there are some better improvements for it.



Here is a program which describes what I am trying:



#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

#define SECONDS 20

static char *program_path = NULL;

char *my_strtok ( char *const msg, const char *const ch );
void block_new_instance ( const char *const instance );
void clean_instance ( void );

int main ( int argc, char *argv )
{
if ( argc != 1 )
{
printf( "nt*** Arguments are NOT allowed. ***n" );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

block_new_instance( argv[ 0 ] );
sleep( SECONDS );
}

void block_new_instance( const char *const instance )
{
char prog_name[ strlen( instance ) + 1 ];
memset( prog_name, '', sizeof( prog_name ) );
strcpy( prog_name, instance );
char *buffer = my_strtok( prog_name, "/" );
struct flock file_lock;
char *dir = getenv( "HOME" );

if ( dir == NULL || dir[0] != '/' )
{
fprintf( stderr, "Wrong Directory, getenv(): %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

program_path = calloc( sizeof ( *program_path ), strlen( dir ) + ( strlen( buffer ) + sizeof ( "/" ) ) );
if ( program_path == NULL )
{
printf( "Error, malloc()n" );
exit ( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

memcpy( program_path, dir, strlen( dir ) );
memcpy( program_path + strlen( dir ), "/", sizeof( "/") );
memcpy( program_path + ( strlen( dir ) + strlen( "/" ) ), buffer, strlen( buffer ) );

int file_desk = open( program_path, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0600 );
if ( file_desk < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "open: %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

file_lock.l_start = 0;
file_lock.l_len = 0;
file_lock.l_type = F_WRLCK;
file_lock.l_whence = SEEK_SET;

if ( fcntl( file_desk, F_SETLK, &file_lock ) < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "%s is already runningn", buffer );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}
atexit( clean_instance );
}

char *my_strtok( char *const msg, const char *const ch )
{
char *ret = NULL;
char *tmp = strtok( msg, ch );
while ( tmp != NULL )
{
ret = tmp;
tmp = strtok( NULL, ch );
}

if ( ret == NULL )
{
return NULL;
}
return ret;
}

void clean_instance( void )
{
unlink ( program_path );
free ( program_path );
}


Possible Outputs are:




*** Arguments are NOT allowed. **




or:




Program is already running




I would like to know which improvements are needed?










share|improve this question







New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
    – Mast
    2 hours ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I am implementing a library (Linux) and I created some functions to block new instances of a running program and I was wonder if there are some better improvements for it.



Here is a program which describes what I am trying:



#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

#define SECONDS 20

static char *program_path = NULL;

char *my_strtok ( char *const msg, const char *const ch );
void block_new_instance ( const char *const instance );
void clean_instance ( void );

int main ( int argc, char *argv )
{
if ( argc != 1 )
{
printf( "nt*** Arguments are NOT allowed. ***n" );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

block_new_instance( argv[ 0 ] );
sleep( SECONDS );
}

void block_new_instance( const char *const instance )
{
char prog_name[ strlen( instance ) + 1 ];
memset( prog_name, '', sizeof( prog_name ) );
strcpy( prog_name, instance );
char *buffer = my_strtok( prog_name, "/" );
struct flock file_lock;
char *dir = getenv( "HOME" );

if ( dir == NULL || dir[0] != '/' )
{
fprintf( stderr, "Wrong Directory, getenv(): %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

program_path = calloc( sizeof ( *program_path ), strlen( dir ) + ( strlen( buffer ) + sizeof ( "/" ) ) );
if ( program_path == NULL )
{
printf( "Error, malloc()n" );
exit ( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

memcpy( program_path, dir, strlen( dir ) );
memcpy( program_path + strlen( dir ), "/", sizeof( "/") );
memcpy( program_path + ( strlen( dir ) + strlen( "/" ) ), buffer, strlen( buffer ) );

int file_desk = open( program_path, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0600 );
if ( file_desk < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "open: %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

file_lock.l_start = 0;
file_lock.l_len = 0;
file_lock.l_type = F_WRLCK;
file_lock.l_whence = SEEK_SET;

if ( fcntl( file_desk, F_SETLK, &file_lock ) < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "%s is already runningn", buffer );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}
atexit( clean_instance );
}

char *my_strtok( char *const msg, const char *const ch )
{
char *ret = NULL;
char *tmp = strtok( msg, ch );
while ( tmp != NULL )
{
ret = tmp;
tmp = strtok( NULL, ch );
}

if ( ret == NULL )
{
return NULL;
}
return ret;
}

void clean_instance( void )
{
unlink ( program_path );
free ( program_path );
}


Possible Outputs are:




*** Arguments are NOT allowed. **




or:




Program is already running




I would like to know which improvements are needed?










share|improve this question







New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I am implementing a library (Linux) and I created some functions to block new instances of a running program and I was wonder if there are some better improvements for it.



Here is a program which describes what I am trying:



#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>

#define SECONDS 20

static char *program_path = NULL;

char *my_strtok ( char *const msg, const char *const ch );
void block_new_instance ( const char *const instance );
void clean_instance ( void );

int main ( int argc, char *argv )
{
if ( argc != 1 )
{
printf( "nt*** Arguments are NOT allowed. ***n" );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

block_new_instance( argv[ 0 ] );
sleep( SECONDS );
}

void block_new_instance( const char *const instance )
{
char prog_name[ strlen( instance ) + 1 ];
memset( prog_name, '', sizeof( prog_name ) );
strcpy( prog_name, instance );
char *buffer = my_strtok( prog_name, "/" );
struct flock file_lock;
char *dir = getenv( "HOME" );

if ( dir == NULL || dir[0] != '/' )
{
fprintf( stderr, "Wrong Directory, getenv(): %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

program_path = calloc( sizeof ( *program_path ), strlen( dir ) + ( strlen( buffer ) + sizeof ( "/" ) ) );
if ( program_path == NULL )
{
printf( "Error, malloc()n" );
exit ( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

memcpy( program_path, dir, strlen( dir ) );
memcpy( program_path + strlen( dir ), "/", sizeof( "/") );
memcpy( program_path + ( strlen( dir ) + strlen( "/" ) ), buffer, strlen( buffer ) );

int file_desk = open( program_path, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0600 );
if ( file_desk < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "open: %s (%d)n", strerror( errno ), errno );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}

file_lock.l_start = 0;
file_lock.l_len = 0;
file_lock.l_type = F_WRLCK;
file_lock.l_whence = SEEK_SET;

if ( fcntl( file_desk, F_SETLK, &file_lock ) < 0 )
{
fprintf( stderr, "%s is already runningn", buffer );
exit( EXIT_FAILURE );
}
atexit( clean_instance );
}

char *my_strtok( char *const msg, const char *const ch )
{
char *ret = NULL;
char *tmp = strtok( msg, ch );
while ( tmp != NULL )
{
ret = tmp;
tmp = strtok( NULL, ch );
}

if ( ret == NULL )
{
return NULL;
}
return ret;
}

void clean_instance( void )
{
unlink ( program_path );
free ( program_path );
}


Possible Outputs are:




*** Arguments are NOT allowed. **




or:




Program is already running




I would like to know which improvements are needed?







c linux






share|improve this question







New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 hours ago









Michael B.

111




111




New contributor




Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Michael B. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
    – Mast
    2 hours ago


















  • When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
    – Mast
    2 hours ago
















When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
– Mast
2 hours ago




When/Why would you use this? More context would help with figuring out possible (unwanted) side-effects.
– Mast
2 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote














  • Three calls to memcpy seem to emulate sprintf(program_path, "%s/%s", dir, buffer);


  • my_strtok is a not very clean substitute for dirname.


  • The lock file is always created in the home directory, and only accounts for the base name of the executable. It means that /usr/foo would block /opt/foo.


  • The locker does not account for the links (again, it only cares about the base name of the executable). Different names may refer to the physically same file; invocations via links would not lock each other out.


  • A callback registered with atexit is only guaranteed to be called if the program exits normally. If the program is terminated by the signal, the lock file would not be removed.







share|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "196"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Michael B. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209573%2fblock-same-instance-of-a-program-for-running-again%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    1
    down vote














    • Three calls to memcpy seem to emulate sprintf(program_path, "%s/%s", dir, buffer);


    • my_strtok is a not very clean substitute for dirname.


    • The lock file is always created in the home directory, and only accounts for the base name of the executable. It means that /usr/foo would block /opt/foo.


    • The locker does not account for the links (again, it only cares about the base name of the executable). Different names may refer to the physically same file; invocations via links would not lock each other out.


    • A callback registered with atexit is only guaranteed to be called if the program exits normally. If the program is terminated by the signal, the lock file would not be removed.







    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      1
      down vote














      • Three calls to memcpy seem to emulate sprintf(program_path, "%s/%s", dir, buffer);


      • my_strtok is a not very clean substitute for dirname.


      • The lock file is always created in the home directory, and only accounts for the base name of the executable. It means that /usr/foo would block /opt/foo.


      • The locker does not account for the links (again, it only cares about the base name of the executable). Different names may refer to the physically same file; invocations via links would not lock each other out.


      • A callback registered with atexit is only guaranteed to be called if the program exits normally. If the program is terminated by the signal, the lock file would not be removed.







      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote










        • Three calls to memcpy seem to emulate sprintf(program_path, "%s/%s", dir, buffer);


        • my_strtok is a not very clean substitute for dirname.


        • The lock file is always created in the home directory, and only accounts for the base name of the executable. It means that /usr/foo would block /opt/foo.


        • The locker does not account for the links (again, it only cares about the base name of the executable). Different names may refer to the physically same file; invocations via links would not lock each other out.


        • A callback registered with atexit is only guaranteed to be called if the program exits normally. If the program is terminated by the signal, the lock file would not be removed.







        share|improve this answer













        • Three calls to memcpy seem to emulate sprintf(program_path, "%s/%s", dir, buffer);


        • my_strtok is a not very clean substitute for dirname.


        • The lock file is always created in the home directory, and only accounts for the base name of the executable. It means that /usr/foo would block /opt/foo.


        • The locker does not account for the links (again, it only cares about the base name of the executable). Different names may refer to the physically same file; invocations via links would not lock each other out.


        • A callback registered with atexit is only guaranteed to be called if the program exits normally. If the program is terminated by the signal, the lock file would not be removed.








        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 23 mins ago









        vnp

        38.3k13096




        38.3k13096






















            Michael B. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Michael B. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Michael B. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Michael B. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f209573%2fblock-same-instance-of-a-program-for-running-again%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Feedback on college project

            Futebolista

            Albești (Vaslui)