6 ms·

Systemtap was fantastic, but super finnicky. You had to have debuginfo for the kernel installed plus the source. This was fine for RHEL but kind of a pain els

Systemtap was fantastic, but super finnicky. You had to have debuginfo for the kernel installed plus the source. This was fine for RHEL but kind of a pain elsewhere. Then you run into other problems like sometimes the distro compiler wasn't used to build the kernel you are running and suddenly you couldn't load any stap script. Also the only way to get output was through stdout, there was no easy way to programmatically pull results from an stap script. BPF/BCC solves most of this. You still have to have the sources so you can get the right targets for kprobes, but you don't have the compiler mismatch problem. You can now access the hash maps directly from user space so you can do things like build system monitoring tools that run in production and record really specific information easily. I used systemtap for years, but bcc/bpf is a whole new world.

paxcoder 10y ago
You used past tense in talking about a project last committed to less than 3 days ago. I have no horse in this race but it seems to me like you might.
- josefbacik 10y ago
  Or I just mistyped and you are reading in too much to it?
  - ignoramous 10y ago
    If you mistyped it, pls correct it.
    - okket 10y ago
      You can only edit a post for ~1 hour, his is 3 hours old...
  - paxcoder 10y ago
    It's not a typo, it's a theme driven home by your last sentence.
    - kbenson 10y ago
      And that last sentence makes it obvious why he's using the past tense. Systemtap is in his past. When it was last committed to is irrelevant. If I was feeling less gracious, I might call into question whether you actually have no horse in this race, as apparently calling other people's motives and statements into question is apparently fair game for this thread.
      - paxcoder 10y ago
        It might have been clear had it been used to set the tone. But used like this I think it deserves criticism whether intentional or not. While I certainly can be be wrong, I also wasn't assured it wasn't intentional by the way it was explained. I suggest we all mind phrasing and get along this way. P.S. I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat.
        kbenson 10y ago
        > I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat. I wasn't. I was using the idea that someone could imply that to point out your own behavior. That you took it as negatively as you did and assumed there was some deeper implication was the point (that is, that you could, not that it was intended). The only thing you didn't do is connect it to your own behavior in your prior comment.
        paxcoder 10y ago
        I never denied that I have made an implication. I believe I had better grounds for it (or I wouldn't have invested time in checking the project's state in the first place), provided a clearer point for OP to counter, and that that my tone was not as provokative. If you can imagine a more tactful yet still effective alternative deterrent, I'm open to suggestions. I don't believe that just pointing out the fact of the use of the inappropriate tense would have been enough.
        10y ago
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

paxcoder 10y ago

You used past tense in talking about a project last committed to less than 3 days ago. I have no horse in this race but it seems to me like you might.

josefbacik 10y ago
Or I just mistyped and you are reading in too much to it?
- ignoramous 10y ago
  If you mistyped it, pls correct it.
  - okket 10y ago
    You can only edit a post for ~1 hour, his is 3 hours old...
- paxcoder 10y ago
  It's not a typo, it's a theme driven home by your last sentence.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    And that last sentence makes it obvious why he's using the past tense. Systemtap is in his past. When it was last committed to is irrelevant. If I was feeling less gracious, I might call into question whether you actually have no horse in this race, as apparently calling other people's motives and statements into question is apparently fair game for this thread.
    - paxcoder 10y ago
      It might have been clear had it been used to set the tone. But used like this I think it deserves criticism whether intentional or not. While I certainly can be be wrong, I also wasn't assured it wasn't intentional by the way it was explained. I suggest we all mind phrasing and get along this way. P.S. I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat.
      - kbenson 10y ago
        > I don't find it gracious of you to imply that I might be a lying cheat. I wasn't. I was using the idea that someone could imply that to point out your own behavior. That you took it as negatively as you did and assumed there was some deeper implication was the point (that is, that you could, not that it was intended). The only thing you didn't do is connect it to your own behavior in your prior comment.
        paxcoder 10y ago
        I never denied that I have made an implication. I believe I had better grounds for it (or I wouldn't have invested time in checking the project's state in the first place), provided a clearer point for OP to counter, and that that my tone was not as provokative. If you can imagine a more tactful yet still effective alternative deterrent, I'm open to suggestions. I don't believe that just pointing out the fact of the use of the inappropriate tense would have been enough.
        10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]