just my .02 $
what I mostly admire in linux and it's development till now,
is it's flexibility to adapt the dynamic complex changing requirements
from server to desktop even embedded system and real-time system.
>From high throughput to low latency, you just name it!
And still though no one feels disadvantaged,
since features not needed are "removable".
I'm just wondering "if it's worth the effort" to provide
"removable customizable kernel debugging tools (entry/break points)",
which one can replaces with tools of his/her choice.
I'm talking about some unified cleaver reasonable MACROS,
which one can easy insert/use them where needed.
It's still wrong to force development tools to be persist in running system
where they are not needed.
There are lots of "nice things" that can be implemented in kernel,
but are they essential?
Tools should not become burdens!
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
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 Sep 23 2002 - 22:00:17 EST