On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Sergio Schvezov < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Alan Pope <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Jim, >> >> On 8 September 2015 at 13:24, Jim Hodapp <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Or couldn't we just deprioritize apport as a process so that it can't >> use up >> > all of the CPU and truly make it a background task. Is there any reason >> why >> > apport would need normal priority while running? >> > >> >> The result could be worse. >> >> If for example Unity8/Mir crashes, then while apport does its business >> the shell isn't available (obviously, as it's just crashed) and >> doesn't restart until after apport is done. This likely results in the >> user seeing longer periods of "lock up" and will more likely reboot >> the device (the only remedial measure they can take) almost certainly >> resulting in an unusable crash dump, leading to us having no way to >> determine the reason for the initial crash. >> >> > I think we should at the very least warn the user that the phone is uploading crash reports or generating core dumps, so that he at least knows we're slowing down the system on purpose. I would still think, though, that it makes more sense to get a few corrupted crash dumps than to lock every phone so often just because things fall apart. > I'm going to chime in my usual request of asking if apport could be run > only when plugged in to a power source :-) I currently have it disabled now > since it is a pain when on the go where I ended up manually power cycling > because it was faster and "I needed to make that call". > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
