From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261676AbUK2LWG (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:22:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261677AbUK2LWF (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:22:05 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:33029 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261676AbUK2LUL (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:11 -0500 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE 0/7] Diskdump 1.0 Release From: Arjan van de Ven To: Takao Indoh Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkdump-develop@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <3AC4D5FF1413D5indou.takao@soft.fujitsu.com> References: <3AC4D5FF1413D5indou.takao@soft.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1101727191.2814.52.camel@laptop.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2.dwmw2.1) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:19:52 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 19:35 +0900, Takao Indoh wrote: > Hi, all! > I release diskdump 1.0 for kernel 2.6.9. It can be downloaded from > the following site. Please feel free to use it! > http://sourceforge.net/projects/lkdump > > Diskdump project is a joint development of RedHat and Fujitsu, and I'd I think the company name is spelled Red Hat ;) > like to express my gratitude to a RedHat developers for many comments > and advices. Can you explain to me why anyone would want to use this invasive patch (it requires all drivers to change) instead of the kexec-dump approach? The kexec-dump approach appears on first sight to be far cleaner and far more powerful, so there must be a reason this work was done regardless of that.. I'm curious what those reasons are, eg what's the advantage ???