Kerneloops

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Kerneloops

James Westby-9
[Please Cc me on replies as I am no subscribed]

I've been asked to get kerneloops installed by default this cycle, and
I have some ideas about how to integrate it better with apport, however
I would like to know what you would like to get from it.

I have drafted a spec at

  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KerneloopsAndApport

with how I think they should co-operate, but there is an outstanding
question of what you would like reported.

I assume we would like all reports going to kerneloops.org by default?
Do you also want the reports to be sent to Launchpad for tracking as
bugs?

We can look at having them duplicated when they refer to the same
Oops so that you don't have to do that manually, but I want to
know if having them as bug reports would be useful anyway.

Thanks,

James


--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Kerneloops

Manoj Iyer

James,

I tested kerneloops & apport for Jaunty, it filed a bug at kernelopps.org
and also filed a bug in Launchpad. IMHO tagging the launchpad bug such
that it indicates that the bug was reported to kerneloops.org will be a
good thing. Also I noticed that when the crash or oops happned again,
apport will file the same bug again (or ask the user if they want to file
a bug). This was a but annoying. Is there a mechanism to detect that this
bug was already filed and avoid duplicate bugs being filed from the same
machine ?

Is there any mechanism by which I can save the apport data from one
machine and file the bug on kerneloops from a different machine ? This is
specially useful in server setup that does not have network connection to
the outside world.

Cheers
--- manjo

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, James Westby wrote:

> [Please Cc me on replies as I am no subscribed]
>
> I've been asked to get kerneloops installed by default this cycle, and
> I have some ideas about how to integrate it better with apport, however
> I would like to know what you would like to get from it.
>
> I have drafted a spec at
>
>  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KerneloopsAndApport
>
> with how I think they should co-operate, but there is an outstanding
> question of what you would like reported.
>
> I assume we would like all reports going to kerneloops.org by default?
> Do you also want the reports to be sent to Launchpad for tracking as
> bugs?
>
> We can look at having them duplicated when they refer to the same
> Oops so that you don't have to do that manually, but I want to
> know if having them as bug reports would be useful anyway.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
>
> --
> kernel-team mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
>

--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Kerneloops

Amit Kucheria-6
In reply to this post by James Westby-9
On 09 Jun 29, James Westby wrote:

> [Please Cc me on replies as I am no subscribed]
>
> I've been asked to get kerneloops installed by default this cycle, and
> I have some ideas about how to integrate it better with apport, however
> I would like to know what you would like to get from it.
>
> I have drafted a spec at
>
>   https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KerneloopsAndApport
>
> with how I think they should co-operate, but there is an outstanding
> question of what you would like reported.
>
> I assume we would like all reports going to kerneloops.org by default?
> Do you also want the reports to be sent to Launchpad for tracking as
> bugs?

As Manoj already pointed out, tagging the LP bug as reported upstream
(via kerneloops) would be helpful. Is it possible to file the same bug
automatically in bugzilla.kernel.org and LP and link them?

> We can look at having them duplicated when they refer to the same
> Oops so that you don't have to do that manually, but I want to
> know if having them as bug reports would be useful anyway.

Atleast for the kernel, the duplicate finder is relatively useless
because bugs are so HW-dependent. I am fairly certain that we prefer
people to file separate bugs that _we_ mark as duplicate.

/Amit

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Amit Kucheria, Kernel Engineer || [hidden email]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Kerneloops

James Westby-9
In reply to this post by Manoj Iyer
[hidden email] wrote:
>
> James,
>
> I tested kerneloops & apport for Jaunty, it filed a bug at
> kernelopps.org and also filed a bug in Launchpad. IMHO tagging the
> launchpad bug such that it indicates that the bug was reported to
> kerneloops.org will be a good thing.

That's certainly possible.

 Also I noticed that when the crash
> or oops happned again, apport will file the same bug again (or ask the
> user if they want to file a bug). This was a but annoying. Is there a
> mechanism to detect that this bug was already filed and avoid duplicate
> bugs being filed from the same machine ?

That's something I will have to look at.

> Is there any mechanism by which I can save the apport data from one
> machine and file the bug on kerneloops from a different machine ? This
> is specially useful in server setup that does not have network
> connection to the outside world.

This is one thing that integration with apport would bring, you could
just copy the .crash file to a machine that can talk to launchpad and
use apport-cli or similar to submit it from there.

Amit Kucheria wrote:
> As Manoj already pointed out, tagging the LP bug as reported upstream
> (via kerneloops) would be helpful. Is it possible to file the same bug
> automatically in bugzilla.kernel.org and LP and link them?

If the kernel bugzilla enables the LP plugin then my understanding is
that you can push bugs easily to it from LP. I'm reluctant to send
bugs there automatically though. I thought one point of kerneloops.org
was to avoid having bugs for all of these issues in  bugzilla?

> Atleast for the kernel, the duplicate finder is relatively useless
> because bugs are so HW-dependent. I am fairly certain that we prefer
> people to file separate bugs that _we_ mark as duplicate.

That's good to know thanks. I'll not spend time on dupe-detection across
users then.

It sounds like you are happy for kerneloops reports to be filed as LP
bugs as well by default? If so then I will proceed with the
implementation.


Thanks,

James


--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Kerneloops

Amit Kucheria-6
On 09 Jul 06, James Westby wrote:
> Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > As Manoj already pointed out, tagging the LP bug as reported upstream
> > (via kerneloops) would be helpful. Is it possible to file the same bug
> > automatically in bugzilla.kernel.org and LP and link them?
>
> If the kernel bugzilla enables the LP plugin then my understanding is
> that you can push bugs easily to it from LP. I'm reluctant to send
> bugs there automatically though. I thought one point of kerneloops.org
> was to avoid having bugs for all of these issues in  bugzilla?

Not sure what the status of their bugzilla installing the LP plugin is.
Leanne should know more. She was talking to Linux kernel QA over at
Google.

> > Atleast for the kernel, the duplicate finder is relatively useless
> > because bugs are so HW-dependent. I am fairly certain that we prefer
> > people to file separate bugs that _we_ mark as duplicate.
>
> That's good to know thanks. I'll not spend time on dupe-detection across
> users then.
>
> It sounds like you are happy for kerneloops reports to be filed as LP
> bugs as well by default? If so then I will proceed with the
> implementation.

Yes, the idea of apport integration in kerneloops was that we (Ubuntu)
would be cc'ed on all those bugs.

Regards,
Amit

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Amit Kucheria, Kernel Engineer || [hidden email]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Kerneloops

Leann Ogasawara
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 15:27 +0300, Amit Kucheria wrote:

> On 09 Jul 06, James Westby wrote:
> > Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > > As Manoj already pointed out, tagging the LP bug as reported upstream
> > > (via kerneloops) would be helpful. Is it possible to file the same bug
> > > automatically in bugzilla.kernel.org and LP and link them?
> >
> > If the kernel bugzilla enables the LP plugin then my understanding is
> > that you can push bugs easily to it from LP. I'm reluctant to send
> > bugs there automatically though. I thought one point of kerneloops.org
> > was to avoid having bugs for all of these issues in  bugzilla?
>
> Not sure what the status of their bugzilla installing the LP plugin is.
> Leanne should know more. She was talking to Linux kernel QA over at
> Google.

I know that they updated their bugzilla to a newer version so they would
be capable of running the LP plugin.  However, the last I heard was that
they haven't yet installed/enabled the plugin due to an unrelated
security issue that popped up.  Jorge, have you heard anything new?

Thanks,
Leann


--
kernel-team mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team