Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cu programmer 
Sujet : Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?
De : gazelle (at) *nospam* shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Groupes : comp.unix.programmer
Date : 17. Jan 2025, 22:53:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : The official candy of the new Millennium
Message-ID : <vmejgs$33sam$2@news.xmission.com>
References : 1
User-Agent : trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
In article <vmeibp$33sam$1@news.xmission.com>,
Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
Context is Linux (and only Linux).
>
Over the years, I have written many "interposers" - that is, a shared
library loaded with LD_PRELOAD that hooks some system or library call
(e.g., "read").  The interposer usually ends up calling the "real"
function, then doing something special either before or after the call.

Also, wanted to state that the function I am trying to hook is "openat".

"open" I can hook, but "openat" doesn't work.  I think most programs just
call "open", which eventually ends up calling "openat", so that (hooking
"open") works.  But some programs call "openat" directly, and that doesn't
work.

And, also, just to clarify, the whole point of this is to modify the
behavior of a program without the bother of re-compiling it.

--
The randomly chosen signature file that would have appeared here is more than 4
lines long.  As such, it violates one or more Usenet RFCs.  In order to remain
in compliance with said RFCs, the actual sig can be found at the following URL:
http://user.xmission.com/~gazelle/Sigs/Pearls

Date Sujet#  Auteur
17 Jan 25 * (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?16Kenny McCormack
17 Jan 25 +* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?2Kenny McCormack
18 Jan 25 i`- Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?1Kaz Kylheku
18 Jan 25 `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?13Richard Kettlewell
18 Jan 25  `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?12Kenny McCormack
19 Jan 25   `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?11Marcel Mueller
19 Jan 25    `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?10Richard Kettlewell
19 Jan 25     +* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?5Kenny McCormack
19 Jan 25     i`* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?4Marcel Mueller
19 Jan 25     i +* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?2Kenny McCormack
20 Jan 25     i i`- Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?1Marcel Mueller
20 Jan 25     i `- Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?1Richard Kettlewell
20 Jan 25     `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?4Muttley
20 Jan 25      `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?3Kalevi Kolttonen
20 Jan 25       `* Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?2Kenny McCormack
20 Jan 25        `- Re: (interposers): How to workaround the "strong symbols" problem?1Kaz Kylheku

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal