On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 13:02 +0000, Camilo Mesias wrote:
> Having said that the things that can be done with a mere backtrace are
> limited. I would almost always need to look at the corefile too, and
> would be frustrated if it wasn't available. Perhaps the workflow that
> starts with ABRT providing a backtrace needs to be significantly
> different to the workflow for a manually submitted bug. More automated
> perhaps?
>
> What if every component had a placeholder bug for undiagnosed ABRT
> info. Keeping all of them together would help to gauge which are
> significant and which are one-in-a-million cosmic rays flipping RAM
> bits etc.
I think it should work more like the mozilla crash handling system. They
file automatic crash reports in a completely different database which is
more optimized for e.g. data mining and is less work for the maintainer
on a per-bug basis. So, instead of replying and keeping track of every
user crash manually the maintainer gets list of "top crashers it latest
version", "new crashes this week", etc.
I really think this is the only approach that scales to a large
deployment. Having a developer take action for something each user may
do will never scale.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc
alexl@xxxxxxxxxx alexander.larsson@xxxxxxxxx
He's an uncontrollable Amish rock star with a passion for fast cars. She's an
enchanted gold-digging mermaid with a song in her heart and a spring in her
step. They fight crime!
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
