Fernando Herrera wrote: > On 6/18/06, Gustavo Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This sounds like a very good idea. But could you give more details? >> What does the --include option accept? A string, file name, ...? I >> rather pass information through a pipe, really, anything else is bound >> to reach either a cmdline length limit, or force you to create a >> temporary file (if done wrong we'll be seeing those security fixes due >> to bad tmpfile handling in a few months). > > --include points to a filename including the trace. You have also a > --kill <pid> command (not working yet) to get your application killed > by bug-buddy after the bug report. > > I guess that getting a trace in python on mono is not as expensive as > the gdb thing, so there would not be a big delay after the crash and > the bug-buddy interface coming up. But if we have a big delay we could > use instead a named pipe to feed the trace over it, so the bindings > can call bug-buddy inmidiately and then getting/feeding the trace > while bug-buddy shows the progress bar. >
What if bug-buddy accepted input from stdin with "--include -"? Then the caller could use g_spawn_async_with_pipes(). Any security implications there? -- Brent Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> IRC: smitten _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
