Bastien, do I get it right you want to ditch ABRT and teach systemd to detect Python, Ruby, Java, Node.js exceptions?
On 10/11/2016 03:16 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
----- Original Message -----
On Wed, 13.04.16 08:44, Bastien Nocera (bnocera@redhat.com) wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Michael Catanzaro mcatanzaro@gnome.org wrote:
Second, my understanding is that the ABRT developers prefer to improve abrt-cli and tell people to use that rather than coredumpctl.
Any particular reason for that preference? As coredumpctl gets more and more widespread, having the same tool as other distros should make Fedora more approachable which I think is a good thing?
The upstream systemd developers I talked to weren't interested in adapting coredumpctl to be usable for use cases other than for developers.
What precisely do you need?
I asked, through private mail, and after we discussed this face-to-face: " Could you please send me a piece of code that would:
- monitor the journal for new coredumps
- gather information about the crashed binary (abrt collects things like envvars and more that allows us to determine which application or component crashed, whether it's packaged or not, etc.)
- gather information about kernel oopses/lockdep warnings
- store additional metadata about the report, if journald can support that (whether it was reported and where for example)
"
It doesn't claim to be usable for end-users reporting bugs, and the original developers have no interest in making changes that would allow that.
I indeed think coredumpctl should probably be something for more professional users. But I'd be curious what you are missing in coredumpctl.
Some help implementing one of: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82507 So that we can eventually move that down a level from ABRT.
To be fair, I misrepresented the discussion, I was actually told it would be too much work, and that you didn't have the manpower.