On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:02:52 +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> If there is little interest for this project, we will likely decommission it
> the coming weeks (say end of March).
The darkserver project ws initiated AFAIK by me as there is always a problem
how to reproduce an ABRT bugreport.
The darkserver usability problems were related to each other,
a chicken-and-egg problem:
* It never really started working. When I tried to use it once upon few
months when I found time to process some ABRT bugreports which were not
obvious enough darkserver failed and after contacting Kushal Das
(darkserver author) he found some new software or data bug why it did not
work that time.
* There was never a tool making it convenient enough to reconstruct the
tree of files based on their build-ids.
* There was never enough users (was there any besides me?) that started using
darkserver, because of the two problems above.
So I believe darkserver would be great but not in its current state of
Also I believe ABRT project already contains most of the infrastructure and
code required, I believe darkserver could be rather just few lines of code
added to the ABRT project - that is to interactively run the crashed program
with all matching versions of libraries - not just getting the non-interative
core file backtrace (which ABRT submits to Bugzilla).
devel mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org