On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> A (better?) kernel debugger could help (certain) people to help improve
> the long term health, because they can't (or don't want) to use what's
<smartass> like, brain? </smartass>
> or just think they can't easely do it with them. It could help
> certain people who are used to debug a problem in certain ways, to debug
> it, where they have no idea how to do it with the current tools, because
> nobody explained them how to use them for that problem.
OK, let me say some unpleasant things. First of all, disclaimers: (1) I'm
speaking only for myself; (2) I have no religious problems with debuggers.
However, I have problems with patches of the "I don't know WTF it was, but
it seems to go away with the patch below" kind. I have _very_ big problem
with "we have no time to investigate WTF is wrong, $BOSS required fix by
yesterday, with $FOO we will be able to slap something out of shit, saliva
and duct-tape _now_ and to hell with everything else, don't you dare to
say us that it's shit, $RANDOM_REFERENCE_TO_MARKETPLACE" kind of attitude.
I'm sorry, but all I can suggest to that kind of folks is personal,
empathical "fuck you and fuck the crap you produce". I've seen the results
of such patches. On different projects. It _never_ did any good.
"Make it easy" is OK, unless it is followed by "for lusers". And anyone
saying that code reviews are not practical can go and fuck himself. He
will, anyway. Code reviews are MUST. I have no problems with folks who
want to have debugger in addition to that. I consider anyone who wants it
as _replacement_ for code reviews as a dangerous luser who should be taken
out and put out of his misery.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:23 EST