----- Original Message ----- > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:25:44 -0400 (EDT) > Dave Anderson <anderson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > >>>> but nonetheless, it does seem that Steve's patch > > > >>>> to the trace.c module is the better course of action. Does it work > > > >>>> OK > > > >>>> for you? > > > > > > Yes Steve's patch fixes trace segfault for me. > > > > Ok good, thanks. > > > > I've cc'd this to the maintainer -- Xu, can you please review the patchset? > > BTW, I tried to subscribe to the crash-utility discussion list, with no > response. I'd like to take a more active role in helping to maintain > the trace.so extension as I'm the one that will be breaking it in the > future ;-) > > Also, I now have a team working on trace-cmd and the trace.dat file > will be getting more features that crash may want to take advantage of. > > -- Steve > Hi Steve, I didn't see your subscription request go by, but anyway, you're subscribed now. And I wish the current Fujitsu maintainer of trace.c would respond. The package has gone through a few hands since they originally wrote it. So I certainly welcome your support. Thanks, Dave -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
