Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:17:00 -0400
From:      "Ed Maste" <ed.maste@gmail.com>
To:        "Xin LI" <delphij@freebsd.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/truss Makefile amd64-fbsd.c extern.h i386-fbsd.c i386-linux.c ia64-fbsd.c main.c powerpc-fbsd.c setup.c sparc64-fbsd.c syscall.h syscalls.c truss.1 truss.h
Message-ID:  <88607eb20704101217x4e3c81f9xf914f7da7714daf8@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <200704100403.l3A43ZnL057659@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200704100403.l3A43ZnL057659@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/04/07, Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org> wrote:
>   Make use of ptrace(2) instead of procfs in truss(1), eliminating
>   yet another need of an available /proc/ mount.

I've started to do the same thing to gcore(1), in order to make it
work properly with threaded applications.  I've removed its dependency
on /proc/pid/mem, /proc/pid/regs, and /proc/pid/fpregs.  However, it
still relies on /proc/pid/status and /proc/pid/map which are not
directly available via ptrace(2).

This would make the -s option to gcore redundant (since the process
will be stopped after attaching anyway).  I don't know how useful a
core from a non-stopped process is, anyhow.

-ed



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?88607eb20704101217x4e3c81f9xf914f7da7714daf8>