On 06/20/2011 10:52 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > That's a practical attitude, not a hostile or apathetic one.
I do feel Dave's response was hostile, but I can appreciate the practical discussions. I was not trying to argue that Oleg's approach is correct - I just want to defend that utrace is still useful. On 06/20/2011 10:55 AM, Kyle McMartin wrote: > I don't really have an objection to utrace per se, as it is low impact, > just the idea of reverting a bunch of inconvenient code to do it. This point I understand, and I hope Oleg can find a way to bring utrace in without reverting upstream code. Thanks, Josh
