Control: tag -1 +pending
On 09/09/2014 04:40 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Le Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:36:31 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:39 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Did you play with the change you had proposed ?
I tried it but now
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 03:56 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Please find here a patch.
I rewrote apport-notifyd based on what ubuntu is doing in the
update-notifier code.
The patch is also bumping the debhelper compatibility so we are getting
the hardening flags automatically for the
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 02:11 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
But what happens on KDE (or non-gtk based systemss) ?? We should look
for something more generic.
pkexec is good but it is priority optional. But we could ad it to
Recommends.
Perhaps you can help here.
WHen using kdesudo or
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 02:50 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
I was thinking of using pkexec and adding a Depends for it on
apport-notify package.
Looks like that won't work because the pkexec man page clearly states that.
--
Ritesh Raj Sarraf
RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 03:02 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 02:50 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
I was thinking of using pkexec and adding a Depends for it on
apport-notify package.
Looks like that won't work because the pkexec man page clearly states
that.
Le Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:11:06 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 03:56 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Please find here a patch.
I rewrote apport-notifyd based on what ubuntu is doing in the
update-notifier code.
The patch is also bumping
Le Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:55:29 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 03:02 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Tuesday 23 September 2014 02:50 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
I was thinking of using pkexec and adding a Depends for it on
patch 750989 + patch
thanks
Hello,
Please find here a patch.
I rewrote apport-notifyd based on what ubuntu is doing in the
update-notifier code.
The patch is also bumping the debhelper compatibility so we are getting
the hardening flags automatically for the notifier daemon.
This should also
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:34 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Well I guess using a daemon is more generic and indeed more flexible
(not sure using a systemd/upstart user job will work for system crash
report).
The whole reason of using a daemon was to not be bound by any single
software and
Le Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:04:13 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:34 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Well I guess using a daemon is more generic and indeed more flexible
(not sure using a systemd/upstart user job will work for system
crash
On Wednesday 10 September 2014 04:19 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Le Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:04:13 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarrafr...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:34 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Well I guess using a daemon is more generic and indeed more flexible
(not
Le Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:49:42 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
There's one catch though. Applications that crash during OS boot up
until apport-notifyd is started, they will not get tracked. My plan
is to later add some code in the daemon to, upon startup, look at any
On Wednesday 10 September 2014 06:41 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Le Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:49:42 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
There's one catch though. Applications that crash during OS boot up
until apport-notifyd is started, they will not get tracked. My plan
is to
Le Thu, 11 Sep 2014 00:24:20 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Wednesday 10 September 2014 06:41 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Le Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:49:42 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
There's one catch though. Applications that crash
Le Tue, 9 Sep 2014 02:09:56 +0200,
Laurent Bigonville bi...@debian.org a écrit :
[...]
All the code is in src/crash.c from update-notifier on ubuntu.
[...]
Or we could use systemd/upstart user jobs to achieve this (pitti said
something about that on IRC)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:39 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Did you play with the change you had proposed ?
I tried it but now I do not get the apport popups. I'll look into it
sometime later but if you already did, please do share your results.
No I didn't really test it it was a wild
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 12:08 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
All the code is in src/crash.c from update-notifier on ubuntu.
[...]
Or we could use systemd/upstart user jobs to achieve this (pitti said
something about that on IRC)
I always thought that a daemon would be a better approach,
Le Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:36:31 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 05:39 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
Did you play with the change you had proposed ?
I tried it but now I do not get the apport popups. I'll look into
it sometime later but if
Le Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:34:53 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 12:08 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
All the code is in src/crash.c from update-notifier on ubuntu.
[...]
Or we could use systemd/upstart user jobs to achieve this (pitti
Le Fri, 05 Sep 2014 18:26:37 +0530,
Ritesh Raj Sarraf r...@researchut.com a écrit :
On Tuesday 02 September 2014 02:00 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Monday 01 September 2014 05:27 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
I think this is actually a race condition between apport-notifyd
and
On Tuesday 02 September 2014 02:00 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Monday 01 September 2014 05:27 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
I think this is actually a race condition between apport-notifyd and
/usr/share/apport/apport.
Shouldn't apport-notifyd only respond to IN_CLOSE_WRITE inotify events
On Monday 01 September 2014 05:27 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
I think this is actually a race condition between apport-notifyd and
/usr/share/apport/apport.
Shouldn't apport-notifyd only respond to IN_CLOSE_WRITE inotify events
instead of IN_CREATE so we are sure the file is fully written?
Hello,
I think this is actually a race condition between apport-notifyd and
/usr/share/apport/apport.
Shouldn't apport-notifyd only respond to IN_CLOSE_WRITE inotify events
instead of IN_CREATE so we are sure the file is fully written?
Cheers,
Laurent Bigonville
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Package: apport-gtk
Version: 2.14.2-2
Severity: normal
File: /usr/share/apport/apport-gtk
Hi,
When a crash report is generated, apport-gtk is displaying a message
telling in the title that the crash report is invalid and in the body of
the dialog that the permission has not been granted.
24 matches
Mail list logo
