On 12/11/2010 02:05 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:51:39AM +0100, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: > > > > The problem is entirely cosmetic. No data is harmed, the program exits > > > after that, it's just a child thread and the main process don't > > > communicate the exit quite right. So, pretty much everyone who uses > > > calibre sees this. > > > > > > I haven't been able to fix it (any help welcome), so in this case I > > > might want to disable abrt reports for now until it's fixed, but enable > > > them again once it is. If there was some easy way for me to do this > > > without requiring a new abrt package be pushed out that would be > > > great. ;) > > > > > > > added as: "provide a way for maintainers to blacklist their packages > > without changes into abrt package" > > > > https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/wiki/Wishlist > > This sounds wrong to me. Blacklisting a specific trace so further reports > of it get ignored makes sense, but not ignoring all (unrelated) crashes in a package. > > Dave > If ABRT can tell that the backtrace is same as something previously reported then there is no big harm, as it would only add the reporter to CC and won't be generating much noise.. The problem here is that some maintainers doesn't want ABRT reports at all even those not yet reported... Jirka -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
