From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christoph Scholtes Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The emacs_backtrace "feature" Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:54:04 -0600 Message-ID: <505DC2FC.10609@gmail.com> References: <83lig3yaci.fsf@gnu.org> <505CC1FA.4070300@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1348322060 11318 80.91.229.3 (22 Sep 2012 13:54:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:54:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 22 15:54:24 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TFQA3-0005C1-2E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 15:54:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36807 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFQ9y-0005v1-CD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:54:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44097) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFQ9v-0005uk-I1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:54:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFQ9u-0006RL-Kq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:54:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ie0-f169.google.com ([209.85.223.169]:40005) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFQ9r-0006Qu-HB; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:54:11 -0400 Original-Received: by ied10 with SMTP id 10so8649884ied.0 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:54:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UbZL8cquiufcO95bR00y4SNz7G6ttRVln6nve+eKJyE=; b=bcJyV3UDoKPWcXcklWz9RnhO9L305v3zlfm20aRXfUeU9cyTDMwwXcV3QfUAYKFY/x 6b+h5q7n41xQ3TsB7KnKNwTIY/8oydRuPZxh496DPLH0YW0q2eztv3TczbRgEZuZB/g7 d0ZILHRzNNL/nIaHvQG4D2n2nGphVIaOkon53xUHAUFjhbQHF1NYgiWzlySmuBVhyXXS Itj9ZgUKvKlNLqcy+YoxjQ+YNGCKoZM2pU7V0ixGaPlrB6aw7KHp/30TXsE+v7eObAC5 6S55AOQT8WbA1XAHQ9A1tECyD6vcajHEXacfXiHE9dhKtRZH4Zf65Cwsmj1j2rUDFOX5 q+Hg== Original-Received: by 10.50.47.129 with SMTP id d1mr1148261ign.45.1348322050288; Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:54:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.3] (71-211-247-19.hlrn.qwest.net. [71.211.247.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ng5sm1475245igc.0.2012.09.22.06.54.08 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 22 Sep 2012 06:54:09 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.223.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153461 Archived-At: On 9/22/2012 6:05 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: > Core dumps are better than backtraces if they're available, but > modern GNUish distributions often disable them, alas, and they're > a pain to send via email, and it's nice to have a bit more info > than 'Fatal error 27' when Emacs crashes. > > If you get a core dump, you can run GDB and make a backtrace > and mail that. If you get a core dump, you _have_ to run GDB and make a backtrace. Some users might not know how nor care to know how to generate a backtrace from a core dump. I believe this is independent of the platform they are running on. I think an automated way of generating backtraces is a good idea. The more we can automate the process of gathering information in case of a crash, the more likely users are to submit that information. What do you think about the following: Check if gdb is available (on startup, or when the crash happens). If it is, run something like 'gdb -batch-silent -ex 'thread apply all bt full'' and save backtrace to a file that can be attached to bug report. If it isn't, fall back to the backtrace() function and generate at least something. Or we ask the user what she wants to do: 1. Create backtrace (with or without gdb) and attach to bug report 2. Attach debugger 3. Nothing This could be an option, too, like debug-on-error: create-backtrace-on-error or something like that. Christoph