> 	Understood, but for my purposes, KGDB does a far superior job
> to DDB. It's a bummer that it's not in the i386 port.

I agree 100%...  I _hate_ using DDB; KGDB has been much more reliable,
and much much much easier to use than DDB, in my experience.

Only think KGDB loses is if you have only one system, and so don't
have another machine on which you can run the debugger...


> Has any thought
> gone into changing that? (i.e., was it ripped out, or just nobody
> bothered because DDB was considered a better use of effort?)

I think it's more like: "KGDB was never really completely integrated
into the NetBSD i386 code, and has slowly fallen into complete
disrepair."

At the time the project started, the machine-dependent bits weren't
available, as I recall.  Apparently nobody has had the
time+inclination to make them work now that they are available (as
part of Lite2).



cgd