lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Availability of kdb

    Allright, You've convinced me. I'll do it. It will require consierable
    support moving forward.

    :-)

    Jeff

    Miles Lane wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > > If you come up with robust, easy to patch source-code-level debugger for
    > > > Linux, some people will use it, and some people won't. If it's better
    > > > than kdb, eventually it'll displace kdb as the external kernel debugger
    > > > of choice. As with all things, the cardinal rule in this community
    > > > still applies: "show me the code".
    > > >
    > > > - Ted
    > >
    > > Thanks Ted. I know, but a kernel debugger is one of those nasty pieaces
    > > of software that can quickly get out of sync if it's maintained
    > > separately from the tree -- the speed at which changes occur in Linux
    > > would render it a very difficult project to maintain. If there's going
    > > to be one (whichever one it is) it would need to be maintained and
    > > dragged along with the kernel proper or it would be a maintenance
    > > nightmare. Linus' dislike of the kernel debugger concept would also
    >
    > I agree with Ted. If your debugger is a highly effective, easy-to-use tool,
    > people will use it and help you with improving it. If the distributions
    > include it, then developers building software with "stable" kernels will
    > use it for checking code that interacts with their kernels in ways that
    > cause trouble. This would be very valuable.
    >
    > This means you get to focus on supporting released kernels. This might be
    > a viable way for you to build a user base. This could eventually lead to
    > use with the development kernel and the growth of support for keeping
    > the debugger in sync with the kernel's architectural changes.
    >
    > I am a Linux tester, not a kernel developer, so this is
    > "for what it's worth."
    >
    > Miles
    >
    > > assure that it would not be considered in design decisions moving
    > > forward, which is probably the biggest disuader in the whole debate. I
    > > don't spend money on things I believe are destined to fail. Until Linus
    > > changes his mind, there's no point ...
    > >
    > > Jeff
    > > -
    > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
    > >
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.025 / U:3.460 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site