What do you do if you don’t have the source for your application and it’s failing because a GNU Library for C (glibc) function is returning something bad to the application? Override the function of interest with your own version. This can be done without having root permissions and without recompiling the libc source. Imagine the thrill of writing your own version of open()! The article contains sample code.
Overriding the GNU C Library
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Not sure of the protocols here, but thanks for the article
The big question is “Why are you using GNU LIBC?” What a big pile of crap. I am sorry I don’t mean to be like a troll but this is what I think.
If you need a library that is fast, small, stable, and portable then consider making your own. It is not difficult if you build pieces as you need them and the benefits are immense.
What I want to know is, what’s so thrilling about writing your own open(). It’s just a stub to call into the kernel. Big deal!
Imagine the thrill of writing your own version of open()!
Oh God, I’m so excited I’m having goosebumps! (hehe, sorry for the sacarstic response)
That’s an interesting POV — care to expand on it? I’m specifically interested in learning what you consider to be glibc’s failings. And is it really that easy to write all your own libraries? It appears to be a time-killer to me. Please explain.
to Rajan r.
In another post you wrote “Would this be a .NET language?”.
Was that a joke or did you mean it?
Speed you really spices up this site. (I mean it). Your comments always stires up a interested discussion.
You are really a good oposite force to “CatBeMac”.
Does anybody know a replacement to Glibc that is smaller in disk footprint?
“The big question is “Why are you using GNU LIBC?” What a big pile of crap. I am sorry I don’t mean to be like a troll but this is what I think.”
I don’t think this is glibc’s fault so much as it is GCC’s fault in general. Simple fact is GCC is a decent compiler for the price, but it isn’t exactly best compiler you can get for Linux. GCC doesn’t optimize very well, especially when compared to something like Intel’s compiler. Of course, Intel’s compiler is very expensive, and for most people, GCC does an OK job.
The same does not hold true for GCC’s standard C++ library though. I am not at all impressed with this library.
Check http://www.uclibc.org
Thanks! I appreciate that. I just wish that more people would discuss, rather than try to shout me down (or as in this case, blow me off).