[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mandatory -dbg packages for libraries?



Le mardi 24 avril 2007 à 18:09 +0200, Reinhard Tartler a écrit :
> Sending core dumps is of course debatable, espec. if you cannot assert
> that no sensitive information is transmitted. Still, Apport is more than
> that. It also describes the mechanism of debug packages (*.ddeb), which
> are generated automatically at build time.

This part is definitely something we should grab from Ubuntu, and
integrate in our tools.

> > Using a central server for symbol lookup like Ben proposed looks like a
> > better idea. It needs gdb to be adapted or wrapped to access them
> > correctly, though.
> 
> Sure. How about generating ddebs like ubuntu at build time, upload them
> to ftp-master along the regular binary packages, and install them in a
> special section on the ftp servers. This way not all mirrors need to
> serve the ddebs.
> 
> We can still leave the choice: sending in core dumps to some centralised
> service which retraces them, or use provided tools so users can download
> the debug data and retrace their crashed on their own.

Instead of sending core dumps, I'd really like to make gdb able to grab
the appropriate data. I'll check whether it is possible to wrap it in
some environment that would gather only appropriate parts of the
debugging files.

Otherwise, the idea of letting the user choose between centralized
operation, downloading debugging symbols or saving the core for future
analysis is definitely appropriate.

-- 
 .''`.
: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=


Reply to: