On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 09:27:21AM -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 06:34:02PM +0530, Rakesh Pandit wrote: > > I too cannot see it in pkgdb nor can find any bugzilla review request. > > > > I will package it this weekend, if no one picks it up till then. > > How is it different than ltrace? ltrace doesn't handle multi-threaded applications, but can trace system calls. It has extensible parameter formatter (dunno about latrace). latrace will have considerably better performance, because there is no context switch involved in tracing, like is the case for traditional breakpoint based tracing. Other related project is dltrace, which like latrace uses LD_AUDIT mechanism. It resides in elfutils repository, which is unfortunate, because fedorahosted doesn't (yet, hopefully) give read-only access for some monotone-related reason. Essentially no work is done on dltrace. I can upload srpm of latest greatest if there is an interest, e.g. among latrace upstream. Yet another related project is ftrace from the "frysk" suite. That uses traditional ptrace approach. It handles threads, allows cherry picking of symbols to trace, and is not limited to symbols with PLT entries. The downside is that it's a bulky monster written in java. Personally I believe the way for future is to write all the tracing and event-handling tools on top of / as part of systemtap, as soon as it's capable of userspace tracing that is. That would give Linux single tool for analysis and debugging of everything from the kernel up. I don't really know much about systemtap though. PM
Attachment:
pgp1uql24JPD3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
