> Nobody seemed to be interested in this toolkit. The (s|l)trace toolkit
and
> kdb seemed to be sufficient for the most developers. (I don't whine here
> either.)
That' ridiculous - there's quite a lot of interest in having a
comprehensive system trace capability. The OLS RAS BoF confirmed that. This
sort of capability is essential for system serviceability. Talk to any
Service Engneer who has to deal with real-word non-recreatable problems,
which are nevertheless of enormous impact to a customer.
I would accept that LTT doesn't yet have all the desired features, but
those are one the way and this demonstates a definite interest in LTT.
Also, LTT is currently or about to be distributed in the Monta Vista's
carrier grade offering, Lineo and TurboLinux's enterprise server offering.
There's also a strong possibility that it will end up in United Linux 1.0
- no interest? I don't think so.
Richard J Moore RAS Project Lead - IBM Linux Technology Centre
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 15 2002 - 22:00:21 EST