Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:13:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:13:06 -0400 Received: from mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.worldonline.com ([212.74.112.71]:31241 "EHLO mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.worldonline.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:12:54 -0400 Subject: Re: Development Setups From: Andrew Ebling To: adam.keys@HOTARD.engr.smu.edu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20011005041759.OPDP14306.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@there> In-Reply-To: <20011005041759.OPDP14306.femail26.sdc1.sfba.home.com@there> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/0.14.99+cvs.2001.09.29.08.00 (Preview Release) Date: 05 Oct 2001 18:15:22 +0100 Message-Id: <1002302124.1034.5.camel@kernighan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I was thinking of starting with a modern machine for developing/compiling on, > and then older machine(s) for testing. This way I would not risk losing data > if I oops or somesuch. Alternately, is there a common practice of using lilo > to create development and testing kernel command lines? Is this a useful > thing to do or is it too much of brain drain to switch between hacking and > testing mindsets? I like the two box strategy and have written a detailed description of how to set it up (right down to the wiring diagram for the serial cables): http://www.kernelhacking.org/docs/2boxdebugging.txt This will become part of the forthcoming kernelhacking-HOWTO... Feedback on this document from anyone would be very much appreciated from anyone :) happy hacking, Andy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/