Jeff,
that 'proposed change' sort of escaped into the wild in a wash of commits from
a 'mhaberler only' state of affairs.
I'll clean that up eventually.
- Michael
Am 11.01.2012 um 15:34 schrieb Jeff Epler:
I belatedly took a look at this proposed change.
The added file backtrace.cc
I belatedly took a look at this proposed change.
The added file backtrace.cc doesn't include a license. If it's
code that you copied from the internet, then you can't just add a
license statement on your own, you have to obey the original (probably
also unspecified) license.
If readlink
Here's a proposed patch to generate a backtrace in task on SIGSEGV, SIGFPE and
SIGUSR1
the SEGV and FPE signals will abort task, sending SIGUSR1 will create a
backtrace and continue. Appropriate Operator message are displayed.
On 16 September 2011 07:48, Michael Haberler mai...@mah.priv.at wrote:
comments?
Looks more helpful than what we get now when we mess up.
--
atp
Torque wrenches are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men
I'd love to have backtraces of users' crashes, but i'm not sure explicit
support in each of our executables is the way to do it. Do you know about
Apport? It's a system-wide crash reporting tool that might be useful for us.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Apport
- Reply message -
From:
I dont think this is necessarily an either-or. These are disjoint use cases IMV.
I concur it would be desirable to have support for something along these lines
for end users. It would be a bit more than configuring that tool though ; we
probably need to setup a site where this stuff gets
