Subject: re: lwp id in ktrace
To: Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: matthew green <email@example.com>
Date: 12/01/2003 17:31:31
[ www, top-posting! ]
Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Nov 27, 10:08am, firstname.lastname@example.org (matthew green) wrote:
> -- Subject: re: lwp id in ktrace
> Yes, by adding a version record. If that record is absent, then we fall
> back to the old code.
> | I've been thinking about this, and I cannot see how we can do it easily
> | in a backwards compatible way. Unfortunately there is no header in the
> | ktrace.out files so that we can deduce the version (we could add a version
> | header now though).
> | is there a way to change the output such that old kdump will simply
> | fail gracefully with new input?
I think what Matt was asking is if an old kdump binary will still be
able to successfully process a new file with a version record?
i don't care about "success" - but i don't want kdump to core dump
or something similarly broken.