Re: DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:

Robert Watson <rwatson@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
I'd certainly be fine with it being added to GENERIC on our various architectures.

s/GENERIC/DEFAULTS/

At the risk of creating a bikeshed, I thought we had a consensus that DEFAULTS should never be used :-).

What I'd love to get, as a bikeshed alternative, would be feedback on the usability of DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps... I know there are a few nits, such as the fact that "continue" at the end of an automatically-run script for a KDB entry event still results in sitting at a DDB prompt, for example.

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps
    ... architectures. ... At the risk of creating a bikeshed, I thought we had a consensus that DEFAULTS should never be used :-). ... What I'd love to get, as a bikeshed alternative, would be feedback on the usability of DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps... ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps
    ... various architectures. ... At the risk of creating a bikeshed, I thought we had a consensus that ... It's one of those things that is so incredibly useful, ...
    (freebsd-arch)
  • Re: DDB scripting, output capture, and textdumps
    ... various architectures. ... At the risk of creating a bikeshed, I thought we had a consensus that ... It's one of those things that is so incredibly useful, ...
    (freebsd-current)