On Wed, 19 May 2010 10:41:26 PDT ron minnich <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Bakul Shah <[email protected]> wrote
>
> > 0. Name syscalltrace is too long :-)
>
> pick a name and I'll change it.
I used strace but don't really care what you call it as long
as it is short! How about ratrace (Ron's ascii trace)?
> > 3. Printing . for isgraph(char) loses information.
>
> that's life. I'm happy to consider a \hex as an alternate print
> scheme, but that complicates parsing? Not sure. Advice welcome. nemo?
A middle ground is to use counted bytestrings. For example
120:<120 bytes of random goop>
> This binary idea is a cancer.
> 1. with text, I can mount /proc from an ARM, and do system call
> tracing on my 386 laptop: text is architecture-independent
> 2. with kernel formatting, I can use awk and rc and perl and whatever
> I want to implement tracing
> 3. textual formats don't need versioning of binary structures.
>
> So, no. It stays as text :-)
Ok! I don't feel strongly either way. But I hope you do
consider counted bytestrings to represent random memory.
It is cheap to parse and produce and doesn't lose info.
