On 02.06.2016 12:33, Jakub Filak wrote:
On 06/01/2016 04:49 PM, Stef Walter wrote:
> On 27.05.2016 13:17, Jakub Filak wrote:
>> The module uses some experimental work and it is definitely not
>> production
>> ready. However, we would love to hear any feedback from you before we
>> spend too
>> much time doing wrong things.
> This is pretty cool.
>
> Thinking about the integration here a bit ...
>
> Is there a relevant journal entry we can use to generate links to the
> problems in question? It would be cool to perculate this up into a
> troubleshooting page and we've planned to use the journal and message
> catalogs to do that:
>
>
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/catalog/
>
> If there was a relevant journal entry that had a catalog message id, we
> could handle that specially and allow the user to click through to the
> Problem, and perform the actions in the video. What do you think?
>
I was thinking about integration too.
ABRT logs several messages when a new problem (coredump, python
exception, koops, ...) is detect but none of those has MESSAGE_ID.
However, we have been thinking about improvements in ABRT logging for
quite a long while and one of our goals is to write a "valuable" error
message to systemd-journal, so I will look into it now.
Do you have any hints/tips/wishes on how you would want the message be
composed?
Great. As I understand it, having a MESSAGE_ID (which is a GUID) present
on a key message that describes the fact that the "Problem" occurred.
This could be added to one or more of the messages you described if you
don't have a single message that covers all the cases.
That's what we planned out during a discussion at DevConf hackfest:
Providing specific UI per "troubleshootable" issue, and then using a
query against the journal to pull up all the various issues, and mapping
them to the specific UI by GUID.
Stef