Well, execve(2) and execvp(3) are both "system" functions. C (which is already black magic for some people) invokes both by calling into functions exported from libc. If you're not super dorky^Wfamiliar with low-level systems stuff, you might guess that the two functions are implemented in the same place and in the same way. That the latter is just a libc wrapper around the former that does a PATH search is arcane detail you don't have to care about 99% of the time.
It's hard to appreciate how the world looks before you learn a fact. You can't unsee things.
Comments
Well, execve(2) and execvp(3) are both "system" functions. C (which is already black magic for some people) invokes both by calling into functions exported from libc. If you're not super dorky^Wfamiliar with low-level systems stuff, you might guess that the two functions are implemented in the same place and in the same way. That the latter is just a libc wrapper around the former that does a PATH search is arcane detail you don't have to care about 99% of the time.
It's hard to appreciate how the world looks before you learn a fact. You can't unsee things.
But the man page section tells you which one is is a a kernel syscall (2) and which is a C library function (3)...
Which is the universally known convention everyone is born with inherent knowledge of. Also, people read man-pages.
What person diving into their shell's source code on Linux doesn't read manpages? Or even man's manpage at least once?
Daniel Huang, the one that wrote TFA? People are different, I don't know what else to tell you. But generally, people don't read man pages or docs.