On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:54:46AM -0800, Xin LI wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mike Tancsa <[email protected]> wrote: > > Are there any security reasons as to why > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=142258 ([patch] rtld(1): add > > ability to log or print rtld errors) > > > > would not have been committed to the tree ? > > I've added kib@ to Cc list. > > It doesn't seem to me that this proposed change would do something > with security? Personally I think the change is reasonable (but we > may want printf be replaced with _rtld_error in rtld.c and use > LD_UTRACE there?)
I also think that UTRACE part is not bad, but will object against the LD_PRINT_ERROR part. FWIW, it should use rtld_printf() instead of printf(), but this is moot point.
pgpBvEH0ASNqL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
