Re: kern/43611: kernel-trace (via ktruss) reports wrong parameter/result values

[David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/43611; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/43611: kernel-trace (via ktruss) reports wrong
 parameter/result values
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:17:17 +0000

 On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:00:07PM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote:
  >  |  Mm, point. Maybe we ought to invent a new kind of tracing for this
  >  |  purpose (since supervised execution was trendy in research for a while
  >  |  and it's getting to the point of moving to production...)
  >  |  
  >  |  I'm not sure if it makes sense for that to be different from a
  >  |  debugger interface or not.
  >  
  >  We already support PT_SYSCALL, although it might be broken in current.
 
 Well, a new kind of tracing that doesn't get entangled with wait() and
 mess up parent process ids.
 
  >  |  Ah. Yeah, I guess that can be useful. The main problem I've always had
  >  |  with strace and truss and whatnot is that the trace output gets mixed
  >  |  with the program's output; when I first found ktrace years ago it was
  >  |  a big step forward.
  >  
  >  For that you can use -o fname and tail -f fname in another pty.
 
 I have no idea why I didn't do that at the time, but it was a long
 time ago and may have involved HPUX.
 
 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland%netbsd.org@localhost