Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:10:26 +0100 From: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> To: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: trowa-4 <trowa-4@yahoo.com.tw>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Process Debugging questions Message-ID: <20061120221026.GC20405@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> In-Reply-To: <86irhlfvg2.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <571883.4868.qm@web72011.mail.tp2.yahoo.com> <86irhlfvg2.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Dag-Erling, On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 11:51:57PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > trowa-4 <trowa-4@yahoo.com.tw> writes: > > FreeBSD provides the ptrace system call for controlling and > > debugging the execution of a process. > > > > An alternative to the ptrace system call is the /proc filesystem. > > > > The functionality provided by the /proc filesystem is the same as > > that provided by ptrace; if differs only in its interface. > > > > Are there having a better method or other method? > > They both suck, for different reasons. In theory, ptrace sucks less > than proc, but it lacks some of proc's functionality, and fixing that > is very hard. Would you take a little time to tell what ptrace lacks and possibly why it is so hard, please ? Thank you. -- Jeremie Le Hen < jeremie at le-hen dot org >< ttz at chchile dot org >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061120221026.GC20405>