Perry wrote: 
> Paul A Vixie writes: 
> > all this talk about DDB has got me re-wondering: will netbsd ever
> > support KGDB?
> 
> It already does on many ports.
> 
> The problem is that if your machine crashes and you don't have another 
> machine attached to it, ddb is your only hope. cgd thinks this isn't
> an issue, but for me, that is the usual case by a big margin.

I think the difference is between machines whose ROM monitor provides for 
sufficient low-level debugging tools to find out what happened (apparently
at least one type of machines cgd uses fits here), and machines that don't
(like the Amiga).

Telling random NetBSD/Amiga users to drop into ddb and either singlestep or
breakpoint forwards until they see where it hangs, or to "trace" and tell us
where it paniced, is uhm... routinely done, and in case of autoconfiguration
time problems the only method to find out what happened.

Now, I agree that a live, or at least coredump, gdb environment, is more 
comfortable for serious debugging.

Regards,
	Ignatios Souvatzis