Re: logging _rtld errors

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:54:46AM -0800, Xin LI wrote:

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mike Tancsa <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Are there any security reasons as to why  ([patch] rtld(1): add
ability to log or print rtld errors)

would not have been committed to the tree ?

I've added kib@ to Cc list.

It doesn't seem to me that this proposed change would do something
with security? Personally I think the change is reasonable (but we
may want printf be replaced with _rtld_error in rtld.c and use
LD_UTRACE there?)

I also think that UTRACE part is not bad, but will object against the
LD_PRINT_ERROR part. FWIW, it should use rtld_printf() instead of printf(),
but this is moot point.

Attachment: pgpGQB4zTyjwz.pgp
Description: PGP signature