On 12/16/2010 03:20 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-15 at 20:03 +0100, Nikola Pajkovsky wrote:
Signed-off-by: Nikola Pajkovskynpajkovs@redhat.com
src/include/report/dump_dir.h | 1 + src/lib/dump_dir.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/include/report/dump_dir.h b/src/include/report/dump_dir.h index 913eca1..849525e 100644 --- a/src/include/report/dump_dir.h +++ b/src/include/report/dump_dir.h @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ void dd_save_text(struct dump_dir *dd, const char *name, const char *data); void dd_save_binary(struct dump_dir *dd, const char *name, const char *data, unsigned size); void dd_delete(struct dump_dir *dd); char **dd_get_unknown_files(struct dump_dir *dd, const char **known_files); +void dd_add_attachments_name(struct dump_dir *dd, const char *name);
Called only from abrt-action-generate-backtrace.c:
dd_add_attachments_name(dd, FILENAME_BACKTRACE);
How abrt-action-generate-backtrace.c knows that backtrace is to be attached? User is likely to be in a better position to decide what to attach and what not to attach.
We attaching backtrace always so I did it as backwards compatibility, but you are right, this must be done in gui/cli.
Moreover, crash_data_t and dump_dir were looking as a semi-generic containers up to now.
This patch adds a new concept, "list of attachments" to the container (why to only one of them, btw?).
I think such change needs to be discussed before it can go into git. The explanation could start with "what problem does this change try to solve?".
Jiri asks me to implement machinery to add an attachment via gui/cli.