Sorry, i don't see any reply. I prepare package for wheezy, changelog here: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=blob;f=debian/changelog;h=56223bdd477cd7a52770eae92cfc5d1c857dea27;hb=wheezy i try to make each changelog record as separate commit with clean description: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/wheezy If i has not a mess, than all changes except one was accepted. I didn't get final reply about #556207 (see inline). And i have yet another question - there was a non-maintainer upload. What package version should be now? В Fri, 9 Nov 2012 10:12:29 +0400 Alexander Golovko <alexandro@ankalagon.ru> пишет: > В Thu, 8 Nov 2012 23:10:46 +0100 > Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> пишет: > > > On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 01:07:18 +0400, Alexander Golovko wrote: > > > > > bacula daemons SIGSEGV handler can call gdb for save some useful > > > (for developers) info about process (stack for all threads and > > > other). Gdb called with bacula user privileges, but files > > > in /proc/<pid>/ owned by root and gdb can't get info about > > > process. This is subject of bug #556207. > > > > > Or you could just let the kernel get you a core file with all the > > info you would want. > > Yes, coredump will be enough and in some cases it required for solve > problem. But it contain some information, such a passwords, that > 1. make impossible coredump publication > 2. require password changing even after privately sending > coredump to developers due to possibility of passwords leakage. > > But thank you for attention to this moment, there is a bacula bug - > daemons don't create coredumps on such signals, i will send bugreport > to upstream. 1. we can't get coredump for bacula daemons http://bugs.bacula.org/view.php?id=1949 2. Upstream declare, that backtrace output enough for bugreports about crashes. > > > > > I'm sorry, but I don't think this is worthy of > > breaking the freeze. > > > > > Yes, user still must install "-dbg" packages before this will > > > work, but this is not so hard work for them as manually changing > > > init scripts. > > > > > Seriously, editing a shell script, hard work? > > Seriously, user must know, what to change before edit shell script. I can add this to documentation, but will not be this poinlessly? -- with best regards, Alexander Golovko email: alexandro@ankalagon.ru xmpp: alexandro@ankalagon.ru
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature