[Crash-utility] Re: How about an enumerated list of issues with the existing kgdb patches?

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:42:32 -0700 Piet Delaney <piet(a)bluelane.com&gt; wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 15:57 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:48:22 -0700 > > Andrew Morton <akpm(a)osdl.org&gt; wrote: > > > > > Plus: I'd want to see a maintainance person or team who > > > respond promptly to email and who remain reasonably engaged with what's > > > going on in the mainline kernel. Because if problems crop up (and they > > > will), I don't want to have to be the bunny who has to worry about them... > > > > umm, clarification needed here. > > > > No criticism of the present maintainers intended! Last time I grabbed the > > kgdb patches from sf.net they applied nicely, worked quite reliably (much > > better than the old ones I'd been trying to sustain) and had been > > tremendously cleaned up. > > So why did you stop including them in the mm patch? Some change in 2.6.17-pre caused it to all stop working. > I recall your quality issue and Tom was all in favor > of resolving them. Was it too much work cleaning up the > patches to meet your needs that lead to the patch being > dropped from the mm series? It all seems reasonably clean now, but I haven't looked closely (nor have I had to)

> kgdb over ethernet is working great, and it looks like there > is plenty of support on the SF mailing list. good. > > > > It's a big step. > > How about a concrete list of patch quality issues that the group > can address to allow your weekly addition to the mm patch as a > set toward eventually integration. >From whom? me? > Wouldn't getting kgdb back into the mm patch series be a reasonable > first step eventual maintenance in kernel.org? Is on my todo list somewhere.