Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 12 Mar 2012 17:50:12 -0700 | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | | Subject | Re: Extending coredump note section to contain filenames |
| |
On 03/12/2012 05:46 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 01:42:18 +0100, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> There is no 100% reliable solution possible -- you have no guarantee of >> any kind that the library executable still exists. > > I have guarantee that the library binary mapped in memory identified by > build-id can be found out there in the could. There is no other guarantee. > And this guarantee fails with other solutions. > > If you say that it is _additional_ info to build-id then yes, one can always > use build-id if everything else fails. But then the non-build-id information > is redundant and it can just lead to wrong toolchain solutions - which has > already happened (Apport).
You're thinking of a particular use case which isn't necessarily the only one that matters. It might be the only one that matters to *you*, but that's very different to what matters to a developer, for example.
And yes of course the build-id should be included.
-hpa
-- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
|  |