Re: ABRT considered painful

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> What's wrong with ABRT?
> 
> Originally, with stock F-12, I had received a couple of good backtraces in
> bugzilla. Incredibly useful. A wonderful improvement over F-11 and older.
> 
> And later? - Recently, in all the backtraces dozens of debuginfo packages
> are missing. :-(
> 
I agree,
Most of the abrt crash bugzilla i am assigned too, have missing
debuginfo packages, kind of use less for debuging.
I can ask the user to install debuginfo packages and get back to me.
But without that i will have to close those bzs

- --
Regards,
Huzaifa Sidhpurwala, RHCE, CCNA (IRC: huzaifas)


GnuPG Fingerprint:
3A0F DAFB 9279 02ED 273B FFE9 CC70 DCF2 DA5B DAE5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iD8DBQFLOsdWzHDc8tpb2uURAgCXAJ9wtE+AsAwTwRs/zh/l3wWjJqOtkgCbB5RR
feqGm/5gDfJn4OOdhpeWEy0=
=f/Mh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux