On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 17:20 +0100, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: > > 2) I really dislike that "local trace generation" and "retrace server" > > are discussed as though they're the only options. If nothing else, for > > many non-trivial apps where abrt is potentially of the most use the core > > you're uploading can easily be hundreds of megabytes; that's not really > > better than downloading hundreds of megabytes. A network debuginfo > > service [1] would approach this problem in a completely different way, > > by letting the client download exactly as much debuginfo as it needs. > > > > I mentioned the debuginfofs many times in ABRT flames, there was however > a problem with our debug tools making it unusable, because one had to > read the whole debuginfo file from the server and few other problems so > that's why the retrace server idea came up. but this should fixed in the > current tools so theoretically nothing prevents us from reviving it.. > once this is done ABRT can easily use it... I have trouble following what you're saying here. At what point does one need to "read the whole debuginfo file"? - ajax
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
