> 
> On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 02:51  PM, <ragge@ludd.luth.se> wrote:
> 
> > As a result of this, I think there may be a reason to remove the
> > kvm database alltogether, especially because it would need a bunch
> > of extra massage anyway to update it if modules are loaded/unloaded;
> > and fall back to the old "nlist" way of retreiving kernel symbols
> > if /dev/ksyms is not in the kernel?
> 
> I think this is a great idea.  It would allow us to remove a bunch of 
> code, as well.
> 
Yes, that is a nice side-effect of it.

Ok, nobody seems to have any special objections, so I will change the
kvm/nlist routines to use the /dev/ksyms interface instead, and retire
the old kvm.db stuff.

-- Ragge