Re: [ANNOUNCE] Merkey's Kernel Debugger
From: Stefan Richter
Date: Wed Aug 06 2008 - 09:38:38 EST
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
and we already have kgdb so you have to also explain why you
can't improve kgdb in the areas it trails mdb.
But the ideal outcome would be if you could contribute patches to
kgdb to the point where it is as good as mdb. It is already in the
That idea sounds familiar, the "suspend2" response, when something new
and significantly different is offered, instead of putting it in and
letting people choose in configuration, take the position that what is
there is good enough, and if the author of the new solution will just
drop all their ideas and slap some band-aids on the existing code it
will be "gooder enough" without actually offering people a choice of
something different.
To be fair, choice in "leaf" features like a debugger is not entirely
comparable to choice in central features. If the infrastructure does
not support all use cases reasonably well, its better to fix the
infrastructure or replace it by a working one, rather than adding a
second infrastructure which is also not general enough.
In this case: Make a side-by-side comparison of features and
shortcomings of the available debuggers (as in Andi's response), then
decide how the best of both worlds can be achieved + used + maintained
most easily --- by having both side-by-side, or by taking over some or
all of one's features into the other. Either way requires contributors
to be interested.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- =--- --==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/