On 07/20/2014 02:34 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 07/20/2014 02:11 PM, Ted Miller wrote: >>> I am trying to understand the relevance of the abrt program. It pops up >>> automatically when somethings acts up, but I can't submit anything to RH, >>> because I haven't paid their fees. It is a very bad user experience to go >>> through the whole process of describing what led up to the problem and get >>> to the end of the process and be rejected with an un-fixable error message >>> (because I didn't buy RHEL support). It seems to me that either: >>> >>> 1. It should be modified so that it points to somewhere that I can file a >>> report (such a place probably doesn't exist). >>> >>> or >>> >>> 2. It not automatically activated (because it is irrelevant to most users). >>> >>> or >>> >>> 3. It should be modified so that it creates a file for submission. >>> >>> Anybody have any reason to have it act the way it does on C6.5? >>> >>> Ted Miller >>> Elkhart, IN >>> >>> P.S. It would be nice if anyone has a hint about why KDE desktop keeps >>> giving me "Process /usr/bin/plasma-desktop was killed by signal 11 >>> (SIGSEGV) errors. My desktop (but not the windows on it) goes black. >>> Usually it comes back in 2-4 seconds, but sometimes it disappears and stays >>> gone. Then I can switch windows with Alt+Tab, but can't open any new ones, >>> and the only way to log out is Ctl+Alt+Backspace. >> The goal of CentOS is to: >> >> "As such, CentOS Linux aims to be functionally compatible with RHEL. We >> mainly change packages to remove upstream vendor branding and artwork." >> >> So, abrt has been modified to remove branding and artwork ... we would >> like to make it more relevant and functional. This is one of the >> packages where we would certainly like the ability to provide something >> better than we do .. patches from the community are welcomed/encouraged >> to make it better. > If I'm not mistaken, doesn't CentOS remove the facilities for using > the Red Hat Network, e.g., through yum? If so, removing abrt or not > having it attempt to use Red Hat's abrt server end would be entirely > consistent with that, even though it goes beyond "removing branding > and artwork". Yep, we will do it. Again, patches welcome.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
