Re: [opensource-dev] Snowstorm dev build
On 2012-10-30 10:48 , Hitomi Tiponi wrote: As day 10 is approaching of the next dev viewer build being 'in progress' I am filled with anticipation at the goodies it must contain to take so long to build. Or is it stuck again and no-one noticed? No... we're focused on the problems in beta, so nothing new is happening in development. There is a deep queue of goodies building up though ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: Put the viewer version into marker files, and report errors only when the version matches
Wouldn't it be better if the crash could be reported anyway - just marking the correct version? With this in place at least crashes won't be misreported, but they also will be not reported to the servers at all, causing statistical deviation - what I believe is the core idea to be fixed. More comments in the JIRA, Ricky Cron Stardust On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Oz Linden o...@lindenlab.com wrote: This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/607/ Review request for Viewer. By Oz Linden. Description In all the marker files used to detect how the viewer run terminates, record the version. When checking the results, report errors only if the current version matches the version in the file. This prevents errors in one version from being reported against the subsequent version. Testing Several simulated crashes both of the modified and unmodified viewers, and some in which the marker file was modified manually to simulate different viewers. Launched the new viewer after different crashes (and normal exits) and confirmed (using logging temporarily added for that purpose) that the reported last exec event was correct - and is always reported as Normal if the previous version and the running version were not the same. *Bugs: * storm-1850 http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/storm-1850 Diffs - indra/newview/llappviewer.h (3d35a13561fc) - indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp (3d35a13561fc) View Diff http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/607/diff/ ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: Put the viewer version into marker files, and report errors only when the version matches
Wouldn't this only be an issue, normally, for people switching from one the viewer to another, where there was an leftover crash filer from the older viewer? Doesn't seem like leaving these events out would cause significant deviation. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Ricky kf6...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't it be better if the crash could be reported anyway - just marking the correct version? With this in place at least crashes won't be misreported, but they also will be not reported to the servers at all, causing statistical deviation - what I believe is the core idea to be fixed. More comments in the JIRA, Ricky Cron Stardust ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: Put the viewer version into marker files, and report errors only when the version matches
Well, all I have is anecdotal evidence from my own family of four, everyone an SL user: we all keep multiple versions of the SL viewer, and even a few TPVs, on our machines. If one viewer crashes it's more often that the person it crashes on will relog in another version or viewer - just to avoid the perceived, if possibly inaccurate, cause of the crash. We may switch viewer versions on the second or third crash, depending on the individual, but the effect is the same. Like I said, it's anecdotal. Also I can hardly take my family as typical of SL users, but it's the only population of SL users I can observe. To me it seems that if it's both possible and feasible, the viewer should report and attempt to clean up after a crash - even if it is not its own. This would eliminate any deviation from appearing from this source. Either that, or the marker files should be filename keyed to a version, in which case the next time that particular version launches it will be able to do its own report and cleanup. However this has the negative that the viewer version may not ever be launched again, leaving the keyed marker files cluttering the filesystem. Not a good picture on this logical path either - though it could be kept sane by having any markers older than X be automatically removed - if they are too old it matters little. This path of logic does keep the deviation very minimal, though not eliminated: only those viewer versions that crash and are never re-launched get their report missed. Ricky Cron Stardust On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Argent secret.arg...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't this only be an issue, normally, for people switching from one the viewer to another, where there was an leftover crash filer from the older viewer? Doesn't seem like leaving these events out would cause significant deviation. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Ricky kf6...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't it be better if the crash could be reported anyway - just marking the correct version? With this in place at least crashes won't be misreported, but they also will be not reported to the servers at all, causing statistical deviation - what I believe is the core idea to be fixed. More comments in the JIRA, Ricky Cron Stardust ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
