Missing "two-finds" method of logging files
Kevin P. Fleming
kpfleming at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Oct 27 19:17:08 PST 2003
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> Any command that gets run by nALFS is run in a shell right? So can't we
> prepend the library to the process that nALFS is about to run?
I wasn't clear... the LD_PRELOAD library has to be loaded in the memory
space of _every_ executable that it is going to monitor. That means, for
example, if it was applied to a "make install", it would actually get
loaded over and over again, as commands are run by make. For a large
package (say, glibc), it might get loaded hundreds of times.
> You expressed concerns that this won't work on systems not supporting
> LD_PRELOAD. I've never heard of a Glibc not supporting this.
My point was that people build Linux systems using libraries other than
glibc; it's not common, but it does happen (I have systems using uClibc
right now, but they are firewall routers that I don't do development
on). I wouldn't want to offer only _one_ method of tracking
installed/modified files that would not work with any library other than
glibc; if it's the best method (most efficient/accurate/etc.) that's
fine, as long as we provide some alternative (like the single-find method).
More information about the alfs-discuss