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

Re: Bug#699367: an issue with crash(8) perhaps?



On 02/21/13 09:22, David Magda wrote:

> >>If it is the "crash", can we either get:
> >>(a) the patch added to squeeze package, and/or
> >>(b) wheezy crash backported.
> 
> Any news on whether (a) or (b) will be done? Or is there a (c) that
> hasn't been considered perhaps?

I haven't tried to push for a squeeze backport of crash debugger yet
and honestly I really don't want to push for it unless there is a good
reason. 

Unless I'm missing something, which is entirely possible, I can't see
how this could have an effect on more than one or two users. How many
people are really running a 3.x kernel on top of a Squeeze userspace
AND who also are worried about running the debugger on that specific
live system AND who can't easily workaround it? 

One simple workaround would be to move to the dump to a system running
a new version of crash that supports the 3.0 kernel. 

In wheezy I moved to the minimal rules file that required a newer
version of debhelper so a direct rebuild of the package doesn't work.
However, crash does not require any new dependencies, nor does it need
to be installed to run so it is extremely trivial to build and run
directly from the upstream source. 

Since ware are only talking about users who have explicitly moved to a
kernel that is not part of the original distribution and who also want
to run the crash debugger against it I would say this is a technically
aware user who shouldn't be too put off having to do:

# Grab the squeeze build dependencies for crash
apt-get build-dep crash  

wget http://people.redhat.com/anderson/crash-6.1.4.tar.gz -O - | tar xz
cd crash-6.1.4
make
./crash

Although, maybe I'm missing something and there is enough
justification to do a quick backport. Thoughts?

Troy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: