> The other option is to do it as a global LD_PRELOAD, as I mentioned
> earlier.
I don't know how often I repeated this already:
LD_PRELOAD is a *hack*, not a solution.
There have been enough uses of LD_PRELOAD over the years that perhaps
it's time to consider finding a clean way of giving that sort of
functionality. Right now the choices are:
* LD_PRELOAD
* hacking glibc internals
* throwing features that really shouldn't be implemented in
the kernel-space into the kernel
Given these choices, LD_PRELOAD seems like one of the cleaner
alternatives. If you don't like it, what needs to be fixed with it so
that you'd consider it an acceptably clean alternative?
(Keeping in mind that the natives are getting restless, and the
traditional Unix answer of "No, you really didn't want that feature
anyway", isn't going to hold them off forever. :-)
-Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/