FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-08-2010, 12:22 AM
Christoph Wickert
 
Default ABRT unusable again

Am Sonntag, den 07.02.2010, 22:26 +0100 schrieb Karel Klic:

> The script to find backtraces without debuginfo has been written[1].

Thanks a lot for your work and for your latest mail as well!

> I
> placed the list of found bugs to the Fedora wiki [2]. IMHO only bugs
> with 2 comments should be closed, because 2 comments mean that the
> package maintainer did not touch the bug (ABRT adds 2 comments to every
> bug it creates). We can close 129 bugs this way.

This means that the active maintainers, who responded to their reports
and asked for more info will have no benefit from the script and the
ones who ignored the abrt reports did right. Isn't it ironic?

> > [1] https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/browser/src/Backtrace/abrt-bz-dupchecker
> Its 551 bugs that can be closed as duplicates, not 900. I placed the
> list of affected bugs to the Fedora wiki [3].

IMO all lists should be sorted by package owner. I own ~ 120 packages
and it is a quite lot of work to search all these packages in your
lists.

Regards,
Christoph

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 04:59 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On 02/07/2010 12:52 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 11:20:04 +0100, Stefan wrote:
>
>> On So, 2010-02-07 at 09:03 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
>>> To end-users, it's irrelevant "who is supposed to fix something". Their
>>> complaints are against the product call Fedora and thus expect "Fedora
>>> to fix their product".
>>>
>>> That said: It's irrelevant to Toyota car owners, which supplier
>>> manufactured the parts which have caused Toyota to call back 1000 of
>>> their cars - To them it's Toyota who is reponisible, and Toyota's duty
>>> to fix this issue.
>>
>> But Toyota's employees do not do that after work in their free time.
>> They get paid for it. If someone is paying me to fix bugs for upstream
>> that's fine and I will try to fix every reported bug. I guess a lot of
>> Fedora package maintainers do their packaging stuff in their spare free
>> time and would say it is not the right thing to offload the work to
>> them.
>>
>> The analogy between Toyota and Fedora does not convince me ;-)
>
> That's likely. Because the analogy isn't obvious - and reducing it to a
> relationship between a paying customer and a paid worker makes it even
> less obvious.
> There is an analogy actually. Regardless of whether the Fedora Project
> consists of many volunteers, who do unpaid stuff in their spare time,
> Fedora delivers a product and will have to deal with its consumers and
> negative feedback. The fact that the product is free (as in "free beer")
> should not imply that it is worse than a commercial product.

Exactly. As a "user" I consider the "Fedora distro" to be a product of
the "Fedora Project", regardless of who the people behind this vendor
actually are and regardless of its price.

> How far would
> you want to go with regard to a fat disclaimer about "no warranties",
> "free of charge", "no support", "hobbyist developers", to lower a
> consumer's expectations?

To me, "free of charge" only implies "user will not sue vendor". It's
not a "card blanche" for "low quality" nor for "carelessness/negligence"
nor for "unprofessionalism".

> A huge sticker on top of the product to
> advertise against trying it out? What is the added value we [at Fedora]
> try to add? Surely it isn't that we just lump together software in form of
> RPM packages _without_ testing and _without_ carefully picking releases
> and compatible components. Even if we don't guarantee anything, there must
> be something quality related, which _we_ _try_ to offer.
>
> It's clear that if upstream software quality is poor and if nobody works
> on improving the software, it is more difficult for the Fedora packager to
> deliver quality.

Right, in such cases "the Fedora product vendor's representative in
charge" of the "low quality component of the Fedora product" has decide
upon consequences.

Car manufacturers do the same: It's called QA.

If a supplier doesn't supply the quality they want, they decide upon
what to do: "refurbish/fix the component", "return component to
supplier", switch "supplier", redesign the "component" or even redesign
a larger part of the "product", such that other component vendors'
products can replace the "low quality component".

It's the same in Fedora: If a piece of SW in Fedora is broken, then the
Fedora maintainers needs to take care about it to prevent to Fedora
user-base to be exposed to this bugs. Of course, he can optionally
consult upstream, consult others etc. ... nevertheless it's still the
Fedora package maintainer who is responsible for is "user-base".

> To shrug one's shoulders in reply to problem reports is
> the wrong way, however. And the more problem reports, the more important
> it gets to do something. As a last resort, software could get retired and
> removed from "The Product".

Agreed - ABRT is such a case, IMNSHO. Remove it from the distro and send
its devs "back to the drawing board".

Ralf

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 05:05 AM
Ralf Corsepius
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On 02/07/2010 07:46 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> Secondly, the package maintainer should be informed about what is broken
>> with the chosen/packaged software release. Certainly you don't ask for
>> upstream to filter out *all* reports from all distributions, to return
>> distribution-specific ones into a dist's own bug tracking system,
>
> Most problems are not distribution-specific.

Yes.

> For the ones which are, they
> can close the bugs as DOWNSTREAM, NOTOURBUG or whatever their Bugzilla uses
> for that case and tell the user to report them to the distribution.

No.

A Fedora maintainer acting this way, is cheating at his users and at
himself.

All he does, is delegating responsibility on bugs around, while
* "bug remains unfixed" in Fedora
* "user remains exposed to the bug"

Overall, this results into Fedora consisting of packages suffering from
known bugs. Depending on the severity of such bugs and the amount of the
such bugs, this easily ends up in a low quality distro.

Ralf

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 03:05 PM
Jerry James
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Jiri Moskovcak <jmoskovc@redhat.com> wrote:
> - it actually does work, but it's bug detection/analyse is too general for
> some apps, this is something we know about and it's not in our powers to fix
> (it's not even considered a bug). This is actually the reason why is ABRT
> extendible by plugins and every devel who maintains some bigger app can
> write it's own abrt plugin to make the reports to suit his needs. If devel
> doesn't want to get ABRT reports at all, he can always send me an email and
> it can be added to ABRT blacklist.

Where can information about the plugin API be found? The abrt-plugins
man page has very little information. It basically just says to read
PLUGINS-HOWTO "in the documentation directory". Which documentation
directory is that? I don't see such a file in any of the abrt-*
packages. (I expected to find it in abrt-devel, BTW. That package
contains only 2 symlinks. Where are the header files? Are they not
needed by plugin authors?)

Thanks,
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 03:22 PM
Jiri Moskovcak
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On 02/08/2010 05:05 PM, Jerry James wrote:

On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Jiri Moskovcak<jmoskovc@redhat.com> wrote:

- it actually does work, but it's bug detection/analyse is too general for
some apps, this is something we know about and it's not in our powers to fix
(it's not even considered a bug). This is actually the reason why is ABRT
extendible by plugins and every devel who maintains some bigger app can
write it's own abrt plugin to make the reports to suit his needs. If devel
doesn't want to get ABRT reports at all, he can always send me an email and
it can be added to ABRT blacklist.


Where can information about the plugin API be found? The abrt-plugins
man page has very little information. It basically just says to read
PLUGINS-HOWTO "in the documentation directory". Which documentation
directory is that? I don't see such a file in any of the abrt-*
packages. (I expected to find it in abrt-devel,


Yes, it should be in devel package, will fix this.

http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/abrt.git?p=abrt.git;a=blob_plain;f=doc/PLUGINS-HOWTO;hb=HEAD

> BTW. That package

contains only 2 symlinks. Where are the header files? Are they not
needed by plugin authors?)



Good point, so far nobody wrote a plugin outside of abrt git, so the
devel package wasn't actually never used :-/ I will add the required .h
files into the package and it will be fixed in 1.0.7. Until it's fixed
in rpm, you can download and hack the code using our git from here:


https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/wiki/AbrtInstallation

Jirka
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 03:36 PM
 
Default ABRT unusable again

Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com> writes:

>> I believe ABRT shouldn't file a bug report unless it is filled in
>> properly.
>
> Yeah, some of us have pointed out that before.
> I'm happy about every detailed backtrace I get, but I would be even more
> happy if users contributed a tiny bit more and added comments to their
> tickets and responded to NEEDINFO queries and gave feedback on Test
> Updates. [...]

How much more useful would it be if ABRT had a mode where executables
that recently reported crashes are subsequently/temporarily run with
syscall tracing in the background, so that if they crash again, then
recent process syscall history can also be optionally included in an
ABRT report? This would not be hard to do with e.g. systemtap.

- FChE
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 03:51 PM
Jiri Moskovcak
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On 02/08/2010 05:36 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:


Michael Schwendt<mschwendt@gmail.com> writes:


I believe ABRT shouldn't file a bug report unless it is filled in
properly.


Yeah, some of us have pointed out that before.
I'm happy about every detailed backtrace I get, but I would be even more
happy if users contributed a tiny bit more and added comments to their
tickets and responded to NEEDINFO queries and gave feedback on Test
Updates. [...]


How much more useful would it be if ABRT had a mode where executables
that recently reported crashes are subsequently/temporarily run with
syscall tracing in the background, so that if they crash again, then
recent process syscall history can also be optionally included in an
ABRT report? This would not be hard to do with e.g. systemtap.

- FChE


Such log would be nice, but it might take some time (even days) before
the app crashes again and I can imagine that could generate quite a
large log :-/ Maybe if it would store just last few syscalls...


J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 04:11 PM
Karel Klic
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On 02/08/2010 02:22 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 07.02.2010, 22:26 +0100 schrieb Karel Klic:
>> I
>> placed the list of found bugs to the Fedora wiki [2]. IMHO only bugs
>> with 2 comments should be closed, because 2 comments mean that the
>> package maintainer did not touch the bug (ABRT adds 2 comments to every
>> bug it creates). We can close 129 bugs this way.
>
> This means that the active maintainers, who responded to their reports
> and asked for more info will have no benefit from the script and the
> ones who ignored the abrt reports did right. Isn't it ironic?
Yes, that is unfortunate. However, it is not polite to close a bug in
the middle of some discussion. I can go through the remaining 80 bugs
and close some of them manually.

>>> [1] https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/browser/src/Backtrace/abrt-bz-dupchecker
>> Its 551 bugs that can be closed as duplicates, not 900. I placed the
>> list of affected bugs to the Fedora wiki [3].
>
> IMO all lists should be sorted by package owner. I own ~ 120 packages
> and it is a quite lot of work to search all these packages in your
> lists.
I'll try to do it.

Karel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-08-2010, 04:18 PM
 
Default ABRT unusable again

Jiri Moskovcak <jmoskovc@redhat.com> writes:

> Such log would be nice, but it might take some time (even days) before
> the app crashes again and I can imagine that could generate quite a
> large log :-/ Maybe if it would store just last few syscalls...

Sure, some circular logging, the last few thousand syscalls, no problem.

- FChE
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-09-2010, 02:17 AM
Adam Williamson
 
Default ABRT unusable again

On Sun, 2010-02-07 at 14:16 +0100, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:

> because I guess they would just sit there until bugzapping period.

There's no 'bugzapping period', exactly. BugZappers work all the time,
but only on a small subset of all Fedora packages, we simply do not have
the manpower to cover all of them. So for the many packages which are
not covered by Bugzappers, reports just sit there until the maintainer
chooses to deal with them, or they get killed due to the release for
which they were filed going EOL.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:06 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org