> Talk is cheap.
>
> I've not seen a _single_ bug-report with a fix that attributed the
> existing LKCD patches. I might be more impressed if I had.
>
> The basic issue is that we don't put patches in in the hope that they will
> prove themselves later. Your argument is fundamentally flawed.
comment from userspace:
I'm going to have to side with Linus here despite my desire to see LKCD merged.
However, we need to show him the money. This means:
* making sure that the patches are kept up to date
* keep the LKCD patches in the list/community spotlight in a positive
manner ("please test this!", or "please use this when
looking for help debugging a system problem"). Perhaps
a 2.5.x-lkcd bk tree or something like that.
* make documentation/HOWTO's available for folks so that
they'll know how to generate a crashdump
and run a some utilities against it to generate
a synopsis which can be submitted for debugging
* most important: squash a whole lot of bugs with
said dumps!
If it becomes apparent through empirical data that crash dumps are a useful
tool, I'm sure that Linus will become far more amenable. Until then, lets let
him handle all of his other work which needs to get done.
-- craig
.- ... . -.-. .-. . - -- . ... ... .- --. .
Craig I. Hagan
hagan(at)cih.com
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 22:00:19 EST