On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:34:28 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote: > I don't think there has to be a specific "problem". In fact, I think > Fedora shouldn't really care what *my* problem is. What is interesting > is: I have this feature; It has a certain cost (increase in size) and it > gives certain features. Is the price worth the features it gives? If your feature does not solve any problem it is just a bloat. > * Write backtraces to syslog on coredumps backtrace is overloaded here. Minidebuginfo provides only bare unwinds. > * Allow ABRT to do better duplication matching (the ABRT developers even > want minidebuginfo!) "do better" is too ambiguous and probably not right. Duplication matching can be always done server-side. Minidebuginfo may give less load for ABRT servers for example, this does not match the "do better" phrase. > * Always get some minimal level of backtrace quality, even for rpms > built locally or from other repositories which are not availible > on the retrace servers. (Assuming they are built on a F18 or later > which has this feature.) I do not limit possible solutions only to retrace servers. Cores can be backtraced even locally with full quality by (y) or (z) from my last mail. > * Do system wide profiling and tracing without having to install a lot > of debuginfo. But a poor quality again, there won't be line-specific data for example. > * Help developers by always having at least some level of debuginfo, > even for e.g. uncommon dependencies that you don't typically have > debuginfo for, debuginfo-install does everything on its own, user does not have to care. > or when you don't have a network connection to get > debuginfo packages. This is the only valid point and pre-requisite of all your claims. But I do not find a machine without network connectivity to be useful for anything. > So, does these advantages outweigh the cost? Sure in no way. Regards, Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
