> OK, so here's my (hacky) idea: > (1) Forget ptrace-via-utrace. Have utrace be a separate thing. This > way the recent ptrace changes won't matter.

> (2) But, what about ptrace co-existing well with utrace? Make them > mutually exclusive - a ptraced-process can't be utraced and a > utraced-process can't be ptraced. We had this situation before for a while. It has the substantial downside that e.g. you cannot do any system-wide systemtap tracing without making all strace and gdb use impossible.

> Assuming the above is a semi-reasonable idea, it might be a lot less > work than updating the ptrace-via-utrace code to handle the new ptrace > changes. That's for Oleg to say. (Sorry, Oleg. ;-)