Arun Sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Another advantage of truss is that the output is "online" and interactive.
> ktrace requires you to use kdump to view the trace.
I certainly wouldn't call truss "interactive". As for "online", see
the -l command-line option to kdump.
DES
--
Dag-Erling
Robert Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There are a fair number of differences, but from my perspective, one of
> the primary ones is that truss relies on procfs,
Truss could be easily be rewritten to use ptrace() instead of procfs.
It'd be a lot slower though, because ptrace() can only retur
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 02:02:07 + (UTC), Dag-Erling Smorgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Pirzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So which should I use? Why is there two around? I see that truss has
> > less command line switches than ktrace, but it is a little bit more
> > standard.
>
> -
There are a fair number of differences, but from my perspective, one of
the primary ones is that truss relies on procfs, whereas ktrace uses a
seperate kernel tracing facility. For sites wanting to avoid procfs due
to its history of security vulnerabilities, having truss rely on procfs
means that
So which should I use? Why is there two around? I see that truss has
less command line switches than ktrace, but it is a little bit more
standard.
I also see that truss works with the linux syscalls where ktrace does
not
remap the syscall names.
- JimP
--
--- @(#) $Id: dot.signature,v 1.10 200
5 matches
Mail list logo
