From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F3AD13877A for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:13:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B8141E0C7F; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:13:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D73DDE0C01 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:13:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.195] (CPE002401f30b73-CM78cd8ec1b205.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.224.181.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8901233FC3B for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:13:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53EA20ED.6070009@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:13:01 -0400 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] A constructive reommendation on stablity improvemt References: <53e649e6.c8a1980a.2941.4762@mx.google.com> <53E7DE16.1090406@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <53E7DE16.1090406@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ca3c1e24-1a9e-486e-b2d9-9fe26109a946 X-Archives-Hash: c4ab9bba3b8ee2d001796eea38a4079f -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 10/08/14 05:03 PM, Thomas Kahle wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/08/14 18:18, Igor wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Hereby the summary of my personal suggestions to increase GENTOO >> stability and help it's maintainers and developers. >> >> 1. make.conf >> >> Add >> >> BUG_REPORT_URL "http://"(or similar name) BUG_REPORT ON/OFF >> BUG_REPORT_LEVEL >> >> to make.conf > > Apart from the huge work to implement this, I think any automatic > reporting of build failures will not be useful due to a very bad > signal to noise ratio. Bug wrangling will be insane. What are the > experiences in the industry. Is Mozilla getting anything useful > out of their automatic crash reports? > > Cheers, Thomas > > I haven't been able to track down the right people in mozilla to ask, yet. I have seen some bugs where the developers that work on fixing an issue are indeed referencing the crash dumps that were submitted; i don't know if or how well the crash report submitting links multiple crashes together to the same issue, though. Mozilla also has a very hefty 'try' (tinderbox) system, though, that runs builds on every single commit across every platform that is supported -- I believe they have a number of tools that help aggregate the errors and warnings from those logs to provide useful output to support development, and I think that model might be more comparable to what we would need in Gentoo -- essentially, this project Igor is suggesting would turn the Gentoo community into one massive tinderbox. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlPqIO0ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBfaAD+IKBIQWf0L4WF2pd6iCzdDUU0 l11GSV6NfnpQYG/qilYBAI+bEUHYqxA75Uhrg+m9lqJ0CzwBpm4Tn0ya1MzmiXxC =gi7Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----