Backtracing, Invalidated Bugs and Quality

Null Ack nullack at
Fri Sep 12 08:00:34 UTC 2008

Thanks for all the discussion on this folks. :)

Just now I had a crash in totem with apport leading me to 9 previously
reported bugs that are either invalid or incomplete because the bug
reporter did not do a backtrace to help fix the problem. Now I have
the same issue, when it was originally reported in the first bug
report all the way back in May 2007 with no concrete progress since.

On top of this, people have said that its a recurring discussion that
comes up every six months or so, so lets fix this eh.

To recap, I've suggested that all Alpha builds could be debug by default builds.

Others, such as Markus have what I frankly think is a better idea
where apport tells the user the situation and downloads a debug
version of the package and waits for it to occur again. Then it sends
the backtrace to the right bug for analysis.

Krzysztof seemed to have a promising idea similar to apparently what
MS do "The information about debugging symbols
is only needed on server, client only sends (in simplest version) MD5
sum of library and address offset, which is transformed into the
symbol by symbol serve"

Can we focus on a debate about what the best approach is? This in turn
can lead to the details with implementation.



More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list