* Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> [2010-08-04 09:06]: > > Given that there have been a bunch of issues with kexec > on power that this would resolve. and there is precedence > for tools in the kernel tree, this sounds entirely reasonable to me. > So with my kexec-tools maintainer hat on, I would like to start > a conversation about this. Well, honestly I don't understand the reason behind it. If it's about dependencies between the kexec binary and the kernel version -- there are also dependencies between makedumpfile and crash to the kernel version. Should we move makedumpfile and crash in the kernel tree, too (which means that we have a GDB copy in the kernel tree)? Regards, Bernhard
