Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:18:54 -0500 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, Olivier Houchard <cognet@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/ddb db_command.c db_output.c Message-ID: <20051003171854.GA18710@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <93558.1128359003@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <43416038.6020701@root.org> <93558.1128359003@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 07:03:23PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > There are pro etc con for both methods. Once a dump has been sitting > in a PR for a year, very few people tend to have compatible info > tools available. The counterpoint would be that after a dump has been sitting in a PR for a year, the source base will often have drifted so much that any prior investigative work needs to be re-run. I'm hardly arguing against either solution here -- anything that we can do to cut out one email round-trip on e.g. the i386/kern PRs can only help us. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051003171854.GA18710>