Subject: Re: howto debug kernel
To: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 05/12/1997 17:01:31
Jason Thorpe <email@example.com> writes:
>Yes it is. "We want to make the kernel programming environment =more=
>like userland, not less."
huh? So why not add the printf(3) formats that kprintf(9) doesn't yet
implement, like %X (Mike Long's pet incompatiblity?) and %<N>.<N>s (my
favourite tripping point?)
>And, for someone who complains so much about "gratuitous" change, I'm
>actually quite amazed to see you suggesting sed'ing printf -> kprintf.
Hey! I kind of resent that! I *don't* think I complain about
I've been as anti-nochangenik as anyone on several issues. I do
`complain' about changes that don't actually achieve all the things
they're claimed to, or that (IMHO) twist the kernel design towards
ends that are overly port-specific or hardware-specific.
I've also been very much *pro* the architectural changes you've made.
Jason, if you want to throw ad-hominem argument around, why don't we
do so off a public list?