From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30390 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2007 10:03:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 30381 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2007 10:03:51 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TW_FH X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:03:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lA2A3j8i014591 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 06:03:45 -0400 Received: from pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (pobox-2.corp.redhat.com [10.11.255.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lA2A3jDn019970 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 06:03:45 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn-6-11.fab.redhat.com [10.33.6.11]) by pobox-2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lA2A3hx6010744 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2007 06:03:44 -0400 Message-ID: <472AF5FE.2010900@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 10:03:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frysk Hackers Subject: fhpd user interaction (and corefiles) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q4/txt/msg00099.txt.bz2 In fhpd, there are several scenarios where guessing a user's intentions with the data available becomes difficult. Right now the core file code makes the decision for you. This is wrong and I would like to change that. Consider the scenarios below. No executable specified: - The user specifies a corefile, but no executable. The code finds a named executable as described in the corefile in 'pwd', does it use it? Yes in the current code. - The user specifies a corefile, but no executable. The code does not find a named executable as described in the corefile in 'pwd', but does in /usr/bin or /bin, does it use it? Yes in the current code. - The user specifies a corefile, but no executable. The code does not find a named executable in either of the top two scenarios, and just builds basic metadata. Yes in the current code. Executable specified: - The user specifies a corefile, and an executable, but the executable name does not match the name that the corefile has on record, does it use this executable, warn the user, or abort? No, it blindly uses the executable. - The user specifies a corefile, and an executable. Both match and the corefile code builds rich metadata. Yes in the current code. - The user specifies a corefile, and an executable. Both match, but there are permission issues. How should the core continue here? Right now it ignores the executable and builds basic metadata. One of the sticking points is the dead/LinuxHost.java code does not let the hpd/CoreCommand.java know what it is doing. In fact, unless it throws an exception in building the corefile metadata ,it does not communicate anything at all. It is even further compounded by fstack where beyond current initial bootstrapping there is no bandwidth to ask the user anything. The question here then: if the LinuxHost code has a question for the user, how does it ask that user the question via CoreCommand? As far as I can tell, none of the fhpd commands are interactive. Possible solutions: - Do exactly as the user instructs. Abandon all attempts at executable auto-location. If the user does not specify an executable, no executable is loaded or searched for. Only basic meta data is built. - Allow the user to specify data to the corefile via another command later. Like a file command which specifies an executable and allows the corefile code to reboot and rebuild itself at a later time. - Continue with existing plan above, but allows callbacks and active user interaction with the fhpd - Something else? Regards Phil