That's an interesting idea too... Maybe we still want to know about the crashes. Maybe the crashes could be annotated so that we could filter them out easily on the server-side, but still be able to know how often users are experiencing them.
-Darin On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Mike Belshe <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe turn of crash reporting when these flags are enabled? > Mike > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Wow... we definitely have re-entrancy bugs with --in-process-plugins that >> are not worth fixing. >> Command line options like this are, however, kind of nice since it allows >> you to tell >> a user to try the flag to see if it fixes a particular problem. Maybe we >> could allow the >> option but show a MessageBox at startup warning them about the fact that >> the option >> is unsupported and potentially hazardous to the stability of Chrome. >> >> -Darin >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:16 PM, John Abd-El-Malek <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I was looking at the second top crasher in 2.0.166.1, and it turned out >>> that these users are running with --in-process-plugins. This turns off the >>> sandbox and runs plugins in the renderer process. >>> So far we've exposed all the internal command line switches to all users, >>> but I'm wondering if that has outlived its usefulness. We don't test >>> either mode on chromebot, while in-process-plugins doesn't even have any >>> tests. I don't think spending much development time on these modes is worth >>> the opportunity cost. >>> >>> The flip side is in the past they have been useful to have around, i.e. >>> when someone complains about a bug, we sometimes ask them to try these >>> modes. >>> >>> So I propose that we disable these flags in release builds, and if we >>> want to test on users, we can point them towards debug builds off the build >>> server. Obviously this is more work for them, but I think this avoids >>> distracting us with looking at modes that are only used by a minority of >>> users, and which we know are already broken. The bigger issue is why these >>> users used those modes. I think in the past we might have suggested it to >>> people if they had performance problems etc, but hopefully these are taken >>> care of by now, and if not, better to know it anyways by having these users >>> use the standard multi-process mode. >>> >>> Any strong opposition to this? >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
