Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Petr Mladek wrote Create the wiki pages about getting the windows backtrace. Hi. Draft is available at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/How_to_get_a_backtrace_with_WinDbg. LO Windows developers are asked to comment: - what debug output do they actually need - which additional WinDbg commands should be used (if any) - is mini dump generationanalyse procedure presented there useful (if not - how to do it the right way) Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3989964.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Hi bfo, I am sorry for the late replay. I had busy days. On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 08:55 -0700, bfo wrote: Petr Mladek wrote Yes, any help is really appreciated. If you feel like, please propose some prioritization. From my users perspective the proposal is simple: 1. crashers 2. dataloss 3. regressions 4. something do not work as expected bugs 5. enhancements Nice, it looks very reasonable! I like that it is easy. I am unable to create such easy rules myself ;-) Well, I slightly miss some more aspects: + how many people are affected + how the problem is visible + workaround exists and how it is complicated + how old the problem is (2-3 years old bugs might loose the regression taste; people are getting used to the new behavior; we should not have such regressions but we sometimes end there because it is hard to debug and the other aspects) If I compare it with the rules for Novell bugzilla, I see the following differences: 1. Novell rules put crashers and dataloss bugs on the same level (critical). IMHO, it is reasonable. I guess that you would end there as well ;-) 2. Novell rules do not stress the word regression. They are more influenced by the other aspects and try to split functional problems into three categories (Major, Normal, Minor). I would like to have this in our proposal as well. IMHO, it does not make sense to spend time on regression that is hard to reproduce and fix if there are more important problems that people miss. On the other hand, it makes sense to fix behavior of a new feature that people like and start using heavily. It is not regression but it annoys quite some people. Also we need to somehow propose rules for the priorities flag. Would you be interested into creating more precise proposal that would incomporate the other aspects? We need not make too complex rules. The severity and priority are just helper items. Developers do not strictly follow the flags. Of course, they concentrate more on the severe bugs. Though, when they debug or rework some piece of code, they fix even less important bugs. It is more effective when they have the code in the head. BTW: With time scheduled release cycle (monthly in your case) IMHO it is difficult to triage bugs as blockers or critical anyway. I do not know if you are prepared to do chemspills, emergency releases or stop the release channel if things go wrong big time... Good point! I tried to get out of this trap by rules described at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria#Blocker_Bug_Definition Maybe, but changing to NEW is quite complicated in your workflow, so mostly I leave them as UNCONFIRMED. Heh, what is complicated about it? Is the documentation unclear? IMHO, if you make sure that e bug is reproducible with the given information, you could move it to the state NEW. I thought so, but according to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage there are three bold ANDs before you can change a status to NEW. Further more, an exclamation mark at the end of that paragraph (and the whole scary sentence before it) discouraged me to change anything in the Status field at all. I wonder if the new wording is better. In each case, we need to make it friedly. We need more people doing the bug triage. Best Regards, Petr ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 07:11:03PM +0200, Nino wrote: I gave it a (first) try :) Looking much better already. Thanks! Best, Bjoern ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 13:10 -0700, bfo wrote: Michael Meeks-2 wrote I think it won't do any good in the long term. Enabling reporting tool would give you a chance to get more data without the need to know the bugzilla magic by the users (just opt in to send the reports). It could bring more testers to the project, as now you have to do an own debug build to test LO with proper backtraces (especially on Windows). Then (or I should write Before that) you can think about what to do with the data (and how). Luckily you can use experience of other projects (nice reading at http://blog.mozilla.org/metrics/) or code even and work with dashboards like https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/ or http://brasstacks.mozilla.com/orangefactor for instance. I can see you have quite a few http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org tinderboxes but the question is - how do you use them for QA? Browsing through QA articles I can feel it is more like - download, run, test, report scheme atm. I hope that we could end here. I also like Launchpad from Ubuntu. It merges reports with the same backtrace. So, it automatically handles duplicates. You could easily see how many people are affected and find the related comments on a single location. Note that we need to do this step by step. First, we need to have the builds with debuginfo. Then we need to have infrastructure to filter the results, handle duplicates, ... Finally, we could enable the reporting tool. Note that we already have troubles to filter all the manually created bugs. We are looking for more people helping with the bug triage, see http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage If you could help, please step in. Anyone is welcome to put / link them into whatever wiki page they like :-) if you want it - go for it ! I'm happy to add a link to it at the bottom of my template so it's easy to find in future. Yea... As wiki.d.o can have http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Meetings TDF BoD meetings or http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Committee_Meetings Membership Committee Meetings I simply do not understand why Engineering Steering Committee Meeting are not there. It is very valuable information about what is going on in the project. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/RBd/TSC_Call_Minutes RBd 's notes are a good read, but you know... pasting minutes into wiki template do not need another volunteer... Heh, Michael already does so many things. In fact, he is looking for a volunteer who could join the call and take the minutes. Anyway, you might volunteer and take the minutes from the mailing list and paste them into the wiki. If you prepare the pages and template and if it is easy to add new week, Michael might do it himself in the future. Also I am really concerned about your QA priorities. IMHO you should care little more about Windows builds and MS Office filters. Who is the 'you' here ? you are one of us if you're helping out :-) [...] However, getting the best and fastest possible list of and prioritisation of bugs is a crucial task of QA By you I mean QA Team. We are still building the QA team. Feel free to join and move forward some activities. Reading ESC minutes I do not see general rule of prioritisation of bugs. It is pity but we do not have defined rules for prioritization of bugs. It currently depends on the feeling of the reporters and bug triagers. Would you be interested into creating such a proposal? You might take inspiration in the attached document that describes rules for Novell bugzilla. IMHO, it is reasonable and might fit even LibreOffice. We just need to use LibreOffice-specific examples. Is it 1. crashers 2. regressions 3. enhancements or any other scheme? I can't feel it atm. We use the keyword regression to mark regressions. We motivate developers to work on these bugs with higher priority. AFAIK, we do not have any keyword for crashers. IMHO, we use a workaround because these bugs usually have the work crash in subject. In each case, Rainer is leading the activities in this area. I am not sure if he has it described in the wiki. I can't find it easily. You have MAB meta bugs, but it's more my bug is more buggy than your bug attitude there. This is only a workaround. We do not have enough people to go trough all reported bugs and standardize the priority and severity flags. Users tend to set higher severity for their bug, so the original setting is not useful. MAB is the place for high priority bugs that have been confirmed by a developer or bug triager. MAB wont be needed once we have good rules for setting severities and priorities and enough people who could confirm the original reports. Sadly I'm not QA specialist. I just decided to help LO project by confirming as many bugs as I can find in Bugzilla. Hope this will help increase the quality of LO for Windows in any way... Certainly - it's a really good way
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Petr Mladek wrote If you prepare the pages and template and if it is easy to add new week, Michael might do it himself in the future. Firefox team is using CreateBox Wiki Extension for minutes - check their wiki page at https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform#Meetings Yes, any help is really appreciated. If you feel like, please propose some prioritization. From my users perspective the proposal is simple: 1. crashers 2. dataloss 3. regressions 4. something do not work as expected bugs 5. enhancements BTW: With time scheduled release cycle (monthly in your case) IMHO it is difficult to triage bugs as blockers or critical anyway. I do not know if you are prepared to do chemspills, emergency releases or stop the release channel if things go wrong big time... Maybe, but changing to NEW is quite complicated in your workflow, so mostly I leave them as UNCONFIRMED. Heh, what is complicated about it? Is the documentation unclear? IMHO, if you make sure that e bug is reproducible with the given information, you could move it to the state NEW. I thought so, but according to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage there are three bold ANDs before you can change a status to NEW. Further more, an exclamation mark at the end of that paragraph (and the whole scary sentence before it) discouraged me to change anything in the Status field at all. Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3988078.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Hi Rainer, On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:55:59AM -0700, bfo wrote: I thought so, but according to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage there are three bold ANDs before you can change a status to NEW. Further more, an exclamation mark at the end of that paragraph (and the whole scary sentence before it) discouraged me to change anything in the Status field at all. can we make that text less scary? ;) Best, Bjoern ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On 04.06.2012 18:02, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:55:59AM -0700, bfo wrote: I thought so, but according to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/BugTriage there are three bold ANDs before you can change a status to NEW. Further more, an exclamation mark at the end of that paragraph (and the whole scary sentence before it) discouraged me to change anything in the Status field at all. can we make that text less scary? ;) I gave it a (first) try :) Nino ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Crash counter (search for libreoffice-core): https://errors.ubuntu.com/ Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by most affected users: Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by bug heat: This s very cool. Question - why I have mostly page not find errors when I click in the Bugs report column for libreoffice-core? Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Libreoffice-qa-crasher-bugs-and-most-annoying-bugs-generated-by-automation-was-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug--tp3987469p3988080.html Sent from the QA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 09:02:43AM -0700, bfo wrote: Bjoern Michaelsen wrote Crash counter (search for libreoffice-core): https://errors.ubuntu.com/ Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by most affected users: Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by bug heat: This s very cool. Question - why I have mostly page not find errors when I click in the Bugs report column for libreoffice-core? might happen if the specific bug is still private, which either is an accident or a bug that contains confidential info (e.g. a confidential test doc). Best, Bjoern ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]
Bjoern Michaelsen schrieb: As Ubuntu, we do: https://errors.ubuntu.com/ boaster ;-) Hi, yes, I think such automatted statistics can be a good indicator. Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Michael Meeks-2 wrote On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 11:35 -0700, bfo wrote: I read that you have unused reporting tool in the codebase and plans to bring it back to life. Without it do you know the top crashers? Not really; we rely on human bug filing and QA to bring these to our attention; of course, lots of users simply don't bother to file bugs, but hopefully we get some reports for these. I think it won't do any good in the long term. Enabling reporting tool would give you a chance to get more data without the need to know the bugzilla magic by the users (just opt in to send the reports). It could bring more testers to the project, as now you have to do an own debug build to test LO with proper backtraces (especially on Windows). Then (or I should write Before that) you can think about what to do with the data (and how). Luckily you can use experience of other projects (nice reading at http://blog.mozilla.org/metrics/) or code even and work with dashboards like https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/ or http://brasstacks.mozilla.com/orangefactor for instance. I can see you have quite a few http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org tinderboxes but the question is - how do you use them for QA? Browsing through QA articles I can feel it is more like - download, run, test, report scheme atm. Anyone is welcome to put / link them into whatever wiki page they like :-) if you want it - go for it ! I'm happy to add a link to it at the bottom of my template so it's easy to find in future. Yea... As wiki.d.o can have http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Meetings TDF BoD meetings or http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Committee_Meetings Membership Committee Meetings I simply do not understand why Engineering Steering Committee Meeting are not there. It is very valuable information about what is going on in the project. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/RBd/TSC_Call_Minutes RBd 's notes are a good read, but you know... pasting minutes into wiki template do not need another volunteer... Also I am really concerned about your QA priorities. IMHO you should care little more about Windows builds and MS Office filters. Who is the 'you' here ? you are one of us if you're helping out :-) [...] However, getting the best and fastest possible list of and prioritisation of bugs is a crucial task of QA By you I mean QA Team. Reading ESC minutes I do not see general rule of prioritisation of bugs. Is it 1. crashers 2. regressions 3. enhancements or any other scheme? I can't feel it atm. You have MAB meta bugs, but it's more my bug is more buggy than your bug attitude there. Sadly I'm not QA specialist. I just decided to help LO project by confirming as many bugs as I can find in Bugzilla. Hope this will help increase the quality of LO for Windows in any way... Certainly - it's a really good way to help out. Yes, I started doing that. It seems it moved things a little bit in few bugs already. Should I do something more? Maybe, but changing to NEW is quite complicated in your workflow, so mostly I leave them as UNCONFIRMED. Best regards. P.S. Sorry for off-topic. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3987465.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
crasher bugs and most annoying bugs generated by automation [was: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...]
Hi, On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:35:23AM -0700, bfo wrote: I read that you have unused reporting tool in the codebase and plans to bring it back to life. Without it do you know the top crashers? As Ubuntu, we do: Crash counter (search for libreoffice-core): https://errors.ubuntu.com/ Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by most affected users: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bugs?field.searchtext=crashorderby=-users_affected_countsearch=Searchfield.status%3Alist=NEWfield.status%3Alist=CONFIRMEDfield.status%3Alist=TRIAGEDfield.status%3Alist=INPROGRESSfield.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTEDassignee_option=anyfield.assignee=field.bug_reporter=field.bug_commenter=field.subscriber=field.tag=field.tags_combinator=ANYfield.status_upstream-empty-marker=1field.upstream_target=field.has_cve.used=field.omit_dupes.used=field.omit_dupes=onfield.affects_me.used=field.has_patch.used=field.has_branches.used=field.has_branches=onfield.has_no_branches.used=field.has_no_branches=onfield.has_blueprints.used=field.has_blueprints=onfield.has_no_blueprints.used=field.has_no_blueprints=on Open LibreOffice crasher bugs by bug heat: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bugs?field.searchtext=crashorderby=-heatsearch=Searchfield.status%3Alist=NEWfield.status%3Alist=CONFIRMEDfield.status%3Alist=TRIAGEDfield.status%3Alist=INPROGRESSfield.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTEDassignee_option=anyfield.assignee=field.bug_reporter=field.bug_commenter=field.subscriber=field.tag=field.tags_combinator=ANYfield.status_upstream-empty-marker=1field.upstream_target=field.has_cve.used=field.omit_dupes.used=field.omit_dupes=onfield.affects_me.used=field.has_patch.used=field.has_branches.used=field.has_branches=onfield.has_no_branches.used=field.has_no_branches=onfield.has_blueprints.used=field.has_blueprints=onfield.has_no_blueprints.used=field.has_no_blueprints=on (seeing three of the top five crashers to be related to undo is a big hint in itself -- but also no surprise to LibreOffice developers) CC'ing the qa-list as it might be interesting for bugwranglers too -- bugs generating heat on Ubuntu are unlikely to be harmless elsewhere. Best, Bjoern ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
bfo píše v Po 28. 05. 2012 v 08:37 -0700: bfo wrote As I wrote earlier I have pdb symbols and source links in the WinDbg outputs, but I am concerned about missing FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE and FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE sections. I managed to receive outputs with FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE section just as in Jesus screencast. FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE is still missing, but it is not a big problem, as there is marker in the source code section. Sounds great. I'll put it into wiki page soon. I am looking forward to have anything there :-) Thanks for diffing into it. Best Regards, Petr ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Hi there, On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 11:35 -0700, bfo wrote: I read that you have unused reporting tool in the codebase and plans to bring it back to life. Without it do you know the top crashers? Not really; we rely on human bug filing and QA to bring these to our attention; of course, lots of users simply don't bother to file bugs, but hopefully we get some reports for these. Per platform? Per branch? I do not see such information in ESC minutes (btw: could you put them also in the wiki?). Anyone is welcome to put / link them into whatever wiki page they like :-) if you want it - go for it ! I'm happy to add a link to it at the bottom of my template so it's easy to find in future. Also I am really concerned about your QA priorities. IMHO you should care little more about Windows builds and MS Office filters. Who is the 'you' here ? you are one of us if you're helping out :-) The priorities of participants are highly directed by what interests them, and plenty of people are working on fixing interop. bugs / missing interop. features / problems etc. However, getting the best and fastest possible list of and prioritisation of bugs is a crucial task of QA - along with finding them though of course we have no really firm roles, many people try to do a bit of everything. So I see UI people send patches, hackers do QA, packagers do website work etc. etc. ;-) Sadly I'm not QA specialist. I just decided to help LO project by confirming as many bugs as I can find in Bugzilla. Hope this will help increase the quality of LO for Windows in any way... Certainly - it's a really good way to help out. There is no need for expert skills or experience, just persistence and passion :-) Thanks so much for getting involved, having timely bug reports of windows specific regressions, particularly those with stack traces etc. is excessively helpful really speeds up their fixing. Thanks ! Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
bfo wrote As I wrote earlier I have pdb symbols and source links in the WinDbg outputs, but I am concerned about missing FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE and FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE sections. I managed to receive outputs with FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE section just as in Jesus screencast. FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE is still missing, but it is not a big problem, as there is marker in the source code section. I'll put it into wiki page soon. Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3986407.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Hi bfo, it is great that you continue working on it. Please, do not remove people from CC. There is a lot of traffic on the mailing list. The interested people might miss your replay :-) bfo.bugm...@spamgourmet.com píše v Čt 24. 05. 2012 v 19:56 +0200: I just read in ESC minutes that daily builds with --enable-symbols are again available at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/W2008R2@20-With-Symbol-Bytemark-Hosting/master Unfortunately .pdb files are not available there. Maybe tinderbox administrator could script creating an archives of pdb/source files and upload them just as msi installers? This would be great start... Norbert, would be possible to hack the tindebox script to upload also the .pdb file? I managed to get WinDbg to work with my own LOdev build with symbols and source on Windows 7 using VS 2008 Express. !analyze -v output is not exactly as on sceencast. It lacks FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE and FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE sections, but when I hit Call stack I see links to the source and by clicking it by hand I see used code sections as on screencast. Sounds promising. Yes, I will try to draft an wiki article in few days as a starter to be improved by LO experts, Great. It will help a lot if you start it. but I am not sure if my WinDbg output is any good. It is probably less informative without the .pdb files. Anyway, I guess that your are on the right way. In between I have to practice and browse this list more, as I still have problems building LO 3.5.2.2 by myself (had to disable java, rebasing, postgres connector). Tried with 3.5.4.2 but it is even worse (some cairo canvas errors). If you are lost, just ask on this mailing list. Please, mention there more details about your system, configure options, and the error message with some context. Please, do it in separate mail, so we do not solve too many problems in this thread :-) Maybe tinderbox operators could share their settings with the community? I don't think that they know all the environment configuration by heart. If they do, then wiki articles can be written in minutes :). You might fine some information in the build_info.txt file that is available next to the related daily build. For example, I see at http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/W2008R2@20-With-Symbol-Bytemark-Hosting/master/2012-05-24_23.12.53/master~2012-05-24_23.12.53_build_info.txt --- cut --- tinderbox: administrator: nthieb...@gmail.com tinderbox: buildname: W2008R2@20-With-Symbol-Bytemark-Hosting tinderbox: tree: MASTER tinderbox: pull time 2012-05-24 23:12:53 tinderbox: git sha1s core:2733658dd47e86ac72c53565f1fd8700f884c907 dictionaries:185cbda9dd862458919ae29a70b01ae9106c85ea help:abbbe57b0f8bd5c5b306a76d5d916da1d02cbc27 tinderbox: autogen log running ./configure with '--with-max-jobs=12' '--with-num-cpus=8' '--with-vendor=Bytemark' '--disable-build-mozilla' '--with-ant-home=/cygdrive/c/ant/apache-ant-1.8.3' '--with-mozilla-build=c:/mozilla-build' '--without-junit' '--enable-symbols' '--disable-dependency-tracking' '--enable-ccache' --- cut --- Thanks for digging into it. Best Regards, Petr ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Petr Mladek schrieb: Norbert, would be possible to hack the tindebox script to upload also the .pdb file? https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50339 I managed to get WinDbg to work Me too, with build from tinderbox 20, but gives error message missing symbols. I will continue when I know how to get symbols. But I'm afraid that that will not work for find the reason for the lost of crashes I observe with latest Master Builds, performance with running WinDbg is too poor. Best regards Rainer ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
bfo.bugm...@spamgourmet.com píše v Čt 24. 05. 2012 v 21:20 +0200: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Petr Mladek - pmla...@suse.cz wrote: Please consider. Always you can ask the friendly guys at Mozilla how to set this all up... Thanks for tip. What a discovery! Seems like complete how to: http://zenit.senecac.on.ca/wiki/index.php/Mozilla_Source_and_Symbol_Server Blog postings, bugs on b.m.o, other resources also worth of checking: http://crashopensource.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/starting-the-project-mozilla-source-and-symbol-server/ https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=385792 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=408134 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=419904 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424240 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424817 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=428518 http://web.archive.org/web/20071218162257/http://www.jorgon.freeserve.co.uk/Other/pdb.htm Great catch. Now we need to find a volunteer who would work on this. I have put it into bugzilla and added flags for the EasyHacks pages. See https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50350 It would be great if ESC could go the Mozilla's path of doing things in QA department. The knowledge base is on Mozilla's wiki. Software is... open sourced and available to download. You should get connected to make LO better. Definitely. We are already using Litmus and are going to migrate to Moztrap. Though, we are not familiar with the real processes that used in the Mozilla project. Do you have any experience with the Mozilla processes? Are you able to compare it with the current LibreOffice processes that are described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA ? This is the area where we really need improvements. It would be great if you could join us and discus particular changes on the libreoffice-qa mailing list. Best Regards, Petr ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Petr Mladek - pmla...@suse.cz wrote: but I am not sure if my WinDbg output is any good. It is probably less informative without the .pdb files. Anyway, I guess that your are on the right way. As I wrote earlier I have pdb symbols and source links in the WinDbg outputs, but I am concerned about missing FAULTING_SOURCE_LINE and FAULTING_SOURCE_CODE sections. If you are lost, just ask on this mailing list. Please, mention there more details about your system, configure options, and the error message with some context. Please, do it in separate mail, so we do not solve too many problems in this thread :-) Will do as I stuck on those on my way to master... BTW: I am using sources from http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/. You might fine some information in the build_info.txt file that is available next to the related daily build. Yes, I checked that, but haven't found why I had errors in my attempts to do the builds. Thanks for digging into it. Well, it is very hard for a newcomer as more informations, settings, parameters and tips you can get from the mailing lists than from wiki articles. Hope to edit those a little bit when I succeed. It is hell of a job to browse a huge number of threads to get this running... Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3986052.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Petr Mladek - pmla...@suse.cz wrote: We are already using Litmus and are going to migrate to Moztrap. Though, we are not familiar with the real processes that used in the Mozilla project. Do you have any experience with the Mozilla processes? Are you able to compare it with the current LibreOffice processes that are described at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/QA ? This is the area where we really need improvements. It would be difficult for me to compare it, as I am not a QA/RelEng specialist, insider nor involved in the process. I think you should just check what they achieved at these sites in terms of workflow, automation and data gathering: https://quality.mozilla.org/ https://wiki.mozilla.org/QA/Desktop_Firefox https://wiki.mozilla.org/Socorro https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/products/Firefox https://tbpl.mozilla.org/ http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/module-ownership.html https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/committer/ http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/reviewers.html https://wiki.mozilla.org/Sheriff_Duty https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReleaseEngineering:Sheriffing http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/regression-policy.html https://wiki.mozilla.org/Inbound_Sheriff_Duty One have to remember that Mozilla have full time QA employees and build those tools for years. They changed release cycle recently and also had some problems (being so experienced). As LibreOffice is complicated project maybe you should implement some more automation and crash data gathering. I read that you have unused reporting tool in the codebase and plans to bring it back to life. Without it do you know the top crashers? Per platform? Per branch? I do not see such information in ESC minutes (btw: could you put them also in the wiki?). Depending just on Bugzilla queries IMHO is not enough. Also I am really concerned about your QA priorities. IMHO you should care little more about Windows builds and MS Office filters. Without those it will be a huge problem to gain users on this platform. Unfortunately Windows support and MS format regressions are little scary. I am not a developer, but Microsoft published the documentation at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecifications/cc816059.aspx. Unfortunately changes in the Microsoft policy about compilers (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/05/no-cost-desktop-software-development-is-dead-on-windows-8/) can discourage Windows volunteers or developers even more And no - buy support, pay for code, do it yourself or change OS is not the right answer. It would be great if you could join us and discus particular changes on the libreoffice-qa mailing list. Sadly I'm not QA specialist. I just decided to help LO project by confirming as many bugs as I can find in Bugzilla. Hope this will help increase the quality of LO for Windows in any way... Best regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-3-5-3rc1-win32-debug-package-tp3984895p3986061.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Petr Mladek - pmla...@suse.cz wrote: Please consider. Always you can ask the friendly guys at Mozilla how to set this all up... Thanks for tip. What a discovery! Seems like complete how to: http://zenit.senecac.on.ca/wiki/index.php/Mozilla_Source_and_Symbol_Server Blog postings, bugs on b.m.o, other resources also worth of checking: http://crashopensource.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/starting-the-project-mozilla-source-and-symbol-server/ https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=385792 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=408134 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=419904 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424240 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424817 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=428518 http://web.archive.org/web/20071218162257/http://www.jorgon.freeserve.co.uk/Other/pdb.htm Best regards. P.S. It would be great if ESC could go the Mozilla's path of doing things in QA department. The knowledge base is on Mozilla's wiki. Software is... open sourced and available to download. You should get connected to make LO better. Definitely. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
bfo.bugm...@spamgourmet.com píše v Pá 18. 05. 2012 v 22:22 +0200: On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:13 +0200, Jesús Corrius wrote: In any case, the right way to do it would be to automatically generate all PDBs for each released version, for example in: solver\wntmsci.pro\pdb. Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. I think first we should have the symbol server for Jesus' debug build. Or he should publish the PDB files along with the installer. Hello. I am Windows user interested in helping confirming UNCONFIRMED and other crash bug reports on b.f.o. Please set up the symbol server and even source server just as Mozilla did. This will help people without strong programming knowledge to just run the WinDbg, download the symbols/source, catch a crasher and fill complete bug reports for Windows platform with source excerpt included. I remember that it has been discussed on the ESC meeting two weeks ago or so. I do not remember the conclusion. I know that we want it. I am not sure if we have a volunteer who could do the work. And all that without setting up build environment to generate symbols and source access for WinDbg on their own. Links to Mozilla pages, where all this is well documented: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/How_to_get_a_stacktrace_with_WinDbg https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_the_Mozilla_symbol_server https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_the_Mozilla_source_server https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Debugging_a_minidump Nice pointers. Currently there is only http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_debug article and screencast by Jesús Corrius on YouTube - sadly without step by step wiki article about it. The wikipage would be really helpful. Have you managed to get it working by the screencast? Would you mind to describe the steps on the wiki? Do not be afraid. It need not be perfect. Anyone could improve the text in the future. Please consider. Always you can ask the friendly guys at Mozilla how to set this all up... Thanks for tip. Best Regards, Petr ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:13 +0200, Jesús Corrius wrote: In any case, the right way to do it would be to automatically generate all PDBs for each released version, for example in: solver\wntmsci.pro\pdb. Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. I think first we should have the symbol server for Jesus' debug build. Or he should publish the PDB files along with the installer. Hello. I am Windows user interested in helping confirming UNCONFIRMED and other crash bug reports on b.f.o. Please set up the symbol server and even source server just as Mozilla did. This will help people without strong programming knowledge to just run the WinDbg, download the symbols/source, catch a crasher and fill complete bug reports for Windows platform with source excerpt included. And all that without setting up build environment to generate symbols and source access for WinDbg on their own. Links to Mozilla pages, where all this is well documented: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/How_to_get_a_stacktrace_with_WinDbg https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_the_Mozilla_symbol_server https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_the_Mozilla_source_server https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Debugging_a_minidump Currently there is only http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_debug article and screencast by Jesús Corrius on YouTube - sadly without step by step wiki article about it. Please consider. Always you can ask the friendly guys at Mozilla how to set this all up... Best regards. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:07 PM, Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com wrote: Hi there, Trying to get a good stack trace from vcl, I downloaded 3.5.3rc1 from: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/win32-debug/libreoffice-3-5/ I get a beautiful crash in the MSVC++ debugger, but no symbols; I try to add vcllo.pdb from LOdev 3.5\program and it moans: The symbol file vcllo.pdb does not match the module. In order to match the module must be from the same exact compilation. I looked at the package and it seems *some* modules are missing debugging symbols. Most probably something is not working right in the build system when the debug flag is enabled. In any case, the right way to do it would be to automatically generate all PDBs for each released version, for example in: solver\wntmsci.pro\pdb. Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. With that, any Microsoft debugging tool can access to the symbols with the following path: SRV*c:\symbols*http://symbols.libreoffice.org [1] The advantages of this approach are: - You don't need to download a debug version. - If you have the symbols of all released versions in the servers, the debugging tools will find the right ones for your version automatically. - It's possible to create very nice stack traces automatically if LibreOffice crashes for regular users to report. . On the other side, if you have a server that recieves the crashes without debugging symbols, you can make automatic prepocessing and classification of the bugs once you get the dump from the clients in the server side. In any case, I will try to find some time to look at the issue in my debug builds. Sigh. [1] http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311503 -- Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 12:13 +0200, Jesús Corrius wrote: In any case, the right way to do it would be to automatically generate all PDBs for each released version, for example in: solver\wntmsci.pro\pdb. Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. Right ! I wonder if we can do that for master / 3.6 builds - Fridrich ? having a symbol server: With that, any Microsoft debugging tool can access to the symbols with the following path: SRV*c:\symbols*http://symbols.libreoffice.org [1] Would be awesome save lots of developer time I suspect. :-) Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. But is it documented how to set up such a symbol server? And would we then need to bump the version numbers in the DLLs/EXEs in each and every nightly build? Presumably the MS debuggers want to be quite sure that some symbol file actually matches the executable being debugged. --tml ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
2012/5/10 Tor Lillqvist t...@iki.fi: Then we put those generated PDBs online at symbols.libreoffice.org. But is it documented how to set up such a symbol server? And would we then need to bump the version numbers in the DLLs/EXEs in each and every nightly build? Presumably the MS debuggers want to be quite sure that some symbol file actually matches the executable being debugged. I think first we should have the symbol server for Jesus' debug build. Or he should publish the PDB files along with the installer. Using PDB files for release builds does not sound good to me, because I don't think we should produce release builds with debug configuration (i.e. no optimizations). Andras ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: 3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
On 10/05/12 13:13, Andras Timar wrote: Using PDB files for release builds does not sound good to me, because I don't think we should produce release builds with debug configuration (i.e. no optimizations). ah, another developer who doesn't know what our configure options do (or are supposed to do anyway) :) so there are 3 options, and --enable-symbols differs from the other 2 in that it only adds symbols to the output, it does not enable any debugging feature, or assertion, it does not disable optimizations, and it is primarily used not by developers, but by distributors who want to be able to produce reliable stack traces for _product_ builds, i.e. the Fedora RPM spec unconditionally sets --enable-symbols. AC_ARG_ENABLE(symbols, AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-symbols], [Include debugging symbols in output. WARNING - a complete build needs a lot of space (roughly 10 GiB) and takes much longer (enables -g compiler flag for GCC or equivalent).]), ,) AC_ARG_ENABLE(debug, AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-debug], [Include debugging symbols like with --enable-symbols, disable compiler optimization and inlining plus extra debugging code like assertions. Extra large build! (enables -g compiler flag and dmake debug=true) If you need even more verbose output, build a module with build -- debug=true dbglevel=2. You can also use this switch as follows: --enable-debug=all -sw/ -Library_sc to enable symbols only for the specified gbuild-build targets (all means everything, - prepended means not to enable, / appended means everything in the directory, there is no ordering, more specific overrides more general, and disabling takes precedence).])) AC_ARG_ENABLE(dbgutil, AS_HELP_STRING([--enable-dbgutil], [Include additional debugging utilities, such as assertions, object counting, etc. Larger build. Independent from --enable-debug. Note that this option makes the build ABI incompatible: It is not possible to mix object files or libraries from a --enable-dbgutil and a --disable-dbgutil build.])) ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
3.5.3rc1 win32 / debug package ...
Hi there, Trying to get a good stack trace from vcl, I downloaded 3.5.3rc1 from: http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/win32-debug/libreoffice-3-5/ I get a beautiful crash in the MSVC++ debugger, but no symbols; I try to add vcllo.pdb from LOdev 3.5\program and it moans: The symbol file vcllo.pdb does not match the module. Thoughts ? incompetence unwinds ? it's somewhat frustrating to have a nice, repeatable, null-pointer-dereference crasher and no way of finding where it is ;-) Thanks, Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
