ABRT unusable again
jmoskovc at redhat.com
Mon Feb 8 16:51:57 UTC 2010
On 02/08/2010 05:36 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Michael Schwendt<mschwendt at gmail.com> writes:
>>> I believe ABRT shouldn't file a bug report unless it is filled in
>> Yeah, some of us have pointed out that before.
>> I'm happy about every detailed backtrace I get, but I would be even more
>> happy if users contributed a tiny bit more and added comments to their
>> tickets and responded to NEEDINFO queries and gave feedback on Test
>> Updates. [...]
> How much more useful would it be if ABRT had a mode where executables
> that recently reported crashes are subsequently/temporarily run with
> syscall tracing in the background, so that if they crash again, then
> recent process syscall history can also be optionally included in an
> ABRT report? This would not be hard to do with e.g. systemtap.
> - FChE
Such log would be nice, but it might take some time (even days) before
the app crashes again and I can imagine that could generate quite a
large log :-/ Maybe if it would store just last few syscalls...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 126 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100208/d93221bb/attachment.vcf
More information about the devel