I think he did already Keith -- he said he would reject any kernel debugger submissions. :-) Jeff Keith Owens wrote: > > Various people have replied to my note on "The case for a standard > kernel debugger" discussing whether or not it is a good idea. However > only one person's reply matters here - Linus. I ask other people to > refrain from replying to this thread until Linus has had a chance to > read my note and (if he chooses) to reply to it. > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- The case for a standard kernel debugger Keith Owens
- The case for a standard kernel debugger Keith Owens
- Re: The case for a standard kernel debugger Jeff V. Merkey
- Re: The case for a standard kernel debugger Timur Tabi
- Re: The case for a standard kernel debugge... Marco Colombo
- Re: The case for a standard kernel deb... Frederic Magniette
- Re: The case for a standard kerne... Andrew Morton
- Re: The case for a standard k... Keith Owens
- Re: The case for a standa... Jeff V. Merkey
- Re: The case for a standard kerne... Marco Colombo
- Re: The case for a standard k... Daniel Phillips
- Re: The case for a standa... Andi Kleen
- Re: The case for a standa... Daniel Phillips
- Re: The case for a standa... Jeff V. Merkey
- Re: The case for a standa... Jeff V. Merkey
- RE: The case for a standard kernel debugger Howell, David P
- Re: The case for a standard kernel debugger richardj_moore
- Linux RAS Keith Owens
- Re: Linux RAS Daniel Phillips