Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:26:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> To: Jim Pirzyk <Jim.Pirzyk@disney.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: truss vs ktrace Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1011017132024.34079A-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <3BCCCF74.75B7F36C@disney.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 truss can't be used. truss could probably be easily rewritten to use ptrace() instead. It will be interesting to see how the usefulness of both of these tools changes/evolves due to increases use of threadings and kse. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Jim Pirzyk wrote: > 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 2001/05/17 23:38:49 Jim.Pirzyk Exp $ > __o Jim.Pirzyk@disney.com ------------- pirzyk@freebsd.org > _'\<,_ Senior Systems Engineer, Walt Disney Feature Animation > (*)/ (*) > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1011017132024.34079A-100000>