On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 02:44:50PM +1000, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> Fair enough. I started with -d because that's what bpftrace has, but
> changing to -n for consistency makes sense to me.
Thank you.
OK kn
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:24:12AM -0600, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:22:35 +0100, Klemens Nanni wrote:
>
> > I argue it should be `-n' like all the daemons, e.g. vmd(8) and other
> > parsers such as pfctl(8) do.
>
> Yes, please. I was about to make the same point.
Fair enoug
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:22:35 +0100, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> I argue it should be `-n' like all the daemons, e.g. vmd(8) and other
> parsers such as pfctl(8) do.
Yes, please. I was about to make the same point.
- todd
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 09:41:32PM +1000, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> I'd like to add some regress tests for the btrace(8) parser.
> To do that, it would help to have a dry-run mode where it just parses the
> file and exits.
>
> The way I've implemented it here, it exits immediately after parsing, s
I'd like to add some regress tests for the btrace(8) parser.
To do that, it would help to have a dry-run mode where it just parses the
file and exits.
The way I've implemented it here, it exits immediately after parsing, so it
won't open /dev/dt and try to find the probes the program uses. This m
