On 12/09/2010 02:59 PM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: > On 12/09/2010 02:04 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> On 12/09/2010 01:27 PM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: >>> On 12/09/2010 01:08 PM, "JÃhann B. GuÃmundsson" wrote: >>>> On 12/09/2010 09:59 AM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: >>>>> Just a wild idea - ABRT detects the dupes even locally so we can make >>>>> ABRT to allow reporting the bug to bz only if it happened more then >>>>> once >>>>> (or some other threshold):) >>>> >>>> Dont we loose hard to catch odd ball bugs if that's implemented? >>>> >>>> JBG >>> >>> yes, but those bugs are usually the reason why maintainers are >>> complaining about ABRT.. >> >> Reporters also complain about this for the same reason: >> >> Reporters who are facing an ABRT alert, which complains about missing >> 179 debuginfos (+ have to contact their sys admin to become root and run >> debuginfo-install), who then notice that debuginfo-install installs only > > - debuginfo-install is just a fallback if ABRT fails to retrieve the > debuginfo itself (and ABRT doesn't need the root privs, as is *does not* > install the packages, it just unpacks them) ?!? It has never done so for me (on fedora 13 + fedora 14). ABRT always instructs me to run debuginfo-install, which will fail for obvious reasons in a normal user environment and thus requires me to become root (On "real ordinary user" systems I usually deinstall ABRT). > the 179 dinfos reported by ABRT and 21 debuginfos downloaded is because > ABRT reports the number of missing *debuginfo files*, but > debuginfo-install reports number of *debuginfo packages* which can > contain those 179 files... Nope. ABRT complained about a huge number of missing debuginfo hashes. [BTW: I am referring to a real world example: Yesterday, thunderbird crashed for me. I ended up with 21 debuginfo filling up my / partition and my report having been filed as a duplicate of in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656969]. > To put out the coming flame before it starts - let's create other thread > with subject "ABRT improvements" where everyone interested will write > his RFE, I make a wiki page from it and then we can have a vote about > priorities of those RFEs with the final word from FESCo... What do you > think? Good idea. As you know, I consider ABRT to be a promissing idea, but am critical towards the current ABRT client side, which I, openly said, consider to be "mostly unusable". Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
