While investigating why gdb is failing when it calls `PT_CONTINUE`
against Serenity I noticed that the names of the programs in the
System Monitor didn't make sense. They were seemingly stale.
After inspecting the kernel code, it became apparent that the sequence
occurs as follows:
1. Debugger calls `fork()`
2. The forked child calls `PT_TRACE_ME`
3. The `PT_TRACE_ME` instructs the forked process to block in the
kernel waiting for a signal from the tracer on the next call
to `execve(..)`.
4. Debugger waits for forked child to spawn and stop, and then it
calls `PT_ATTACH` followed by `PT_CONTINUE` on the child.
5. Currently the `PT_CONTINUE` fails because of some other yet to
be found bug.
6. The process name is set immediately AFTER we are woken up by
the `PT_CONTINUE` which never happens in the case I'm debugging.
This chain of events leaves the process suspended, with the name of
the original (forked) process instead of the name we inherit from
the `execve(..)` call.
To avoid such confusion in the future, we set the new name before we
block waiting for the tracer.
70f3fa2dd2