On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:02:52 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > If there is little interest for this project, we will likely decommission it in > the coming weeks (say end of March). The darkserver project ws initiated AFAIK by me as there is always a problem how to reproduce an ABRT bugreport. The darkserver usability problems were related to each other, a chicken-and-egg problem: * It never really started working. When I tried to use it once upon few months when I found time to process some ABRT bugreports which were not obvious enough darkserver failed and after contacting Kushal Das (darkserver author) he found some new software or data bug why it did not work that time. * There was never a tool making it convenient enough to reconstruct the tree of files based on their build-ids. * There was never enough users (was there any besides me?) that started using darkserver, because of the two problems above. So I believe darkserver would be great but not in its current state of functionality. Also I believe ABRT project already contains most of the infrastructure and code required, I believe darkserver could be rather just few lines of code added to the ABRT project - that is to interactively run the crashed program with all matching versions of libraries - not just getting the non-interative core file backtrace (which ABRT submits to Bugzilla). Jan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
