Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Jun 2005 18:08:13 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (kexec/kdump) |
| |
Vara Prasad <prasadav@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > I think all the alternatives out there are less reliable than Kdump > based on the design. Vendors are currently shipping other solutions > since they didn't have any better alternatives until now. The existing > solutions in the two major distro's doesn't work lot of times. I don't > know what percentage of times they work as i only get involved when they > don't work, but i can certainly tell you they don't work many a times. > It is very embarrassing to tell the customer sorry we couldn't get dump > can you try reproducing the problem again. At least two major distros > expressed interest in replacing their current solutions with kdump once > it matures. As you are well aware we are doing testing with as many > configurations as we can to iron out the bugs. Hope this addresses some > of your concerns.
Yes, thanks.
And the meta-goodness here is that at least we have a *design* which is acceptable from this-is-sane standpoint. So at least everyone will be pulling in the same direction.
So as I said, it's a bit of a bet at this point in time, but we've gone as far as we can get with it out-of-tree, so let's merge it and hope that it matures into an acceptably useful dumper. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |