Hi,
does anybody have an idea what's with Kerneloops.org? Or at least some
contacts to admins? The databases seem to be inaccessible. For example
for 2.6.39 I get:
Backtraces reported for kernel 2.6.$version\n"; ?> Kernel Version
miss-match.
The rest doesn't show the bugs from the database too.
thanks,
--
js
On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:45:14 +0200 Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Hi,
>
> does anybody have an idea what's with Kerneloops.org? Or at least some
> contacts to admins? The databases seem to be inaccessible. For example
> for 2.6.39 I get:
> Backtraces reported for kernel 2.6.$version\n"; ?> Kernel Version
> miss-match.
>
> The rest doesn't show the bugs from the database too.
>
> thanks,
> --
> js
Arjan,
Did you see this? Can you answer?
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
Le jeudi 2 juin 2011 06:24:32, Randy Dunlap a ?crit :
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:45:14 +0200 Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > does anybody have an idea what's with Kerneloops.org? Or at least some
> > contacts to admins? The databases seem to be inaccessible. For example
> > for 2.6.39 I get:
> > Backtraces reported for kernel 2.6.$version\n"; ?> Kernel Version
> > miss-match.
> >
> > The rest doesn't show the bugs from the database too.
> >
> > thanks,
>
> Arjan,
> Did you see this? Can you answer?
Still down now. Any news ?
Bastien
ping**5
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Ping**4
>
> Any news of this ?
>
> Can we access to code ? (public git)
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Bastien ROUCARIES
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Ping**3
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:25 PM, bastien ROUCARIES
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Le Wednesday 12 October 2011 14:35:44, Bastien ROUCARIES a écrit :
>>>> Any news now that the fiasco is going to be resolved.
>>>>
>>>> Bastien
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Josh Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Jiri Slaby <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> >> On 08/26/2011 08:48 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>> >>> On 8/26/2011 11:47 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>> >>>> Is the code available somewhere, or will it need to be rewritten ?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> we have the code on the server/etc... if someone signs up to help he
>>>> >>> will be on the server of course
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It looks like there are some volunteers. Did you have a chance to talk
>>>> >> to each other and make any progress?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> If not, may we have at least a backup of the database published, please?
>>>> >> There are very valuable data you collected over time and I'm sure there
>>>> >> are more people than me who would appreciate that.
>>>
>>> Any news of this ?
>>>
>>> Can we access to code ? (public git)
>>>
>>> Bastien
>>>
>>>> >> thanks,
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> js
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
>>>> >> in the body of a message to [email protected]
>>>> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>> >> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>>>> >
>>>> > Apparently kerneoops.org is hosted by kernel.org so there will be no
>>>> > progress until that fiasco is resolved. I'm still up for working on it
>>>> > if and when the site is back online.
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Josh
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:17:35 +0100
Bastien ROUCARIES <[email protected]> wrote:
> ping**5
Please take me off this list. I've no idea what is going on with
kerneloops and its clearly dead. I'd suggest starting from scratch
On 2/14/2012 10:17 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> ping**5
>
so.. with Fedora not really submitting oopses anymore, and the box
wiped/down from kernel.org... what's the point still ??
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:45:25PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 2/14/2012 10:17 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > ping**5
> >
> so.. with Fedora not really submitting oopses anymore, and the box
> wiped/down from kernel.org... what's the point still ??
Just scanning the mailing lists would be good.
But I assume Fedora may be willing to fix their submission?
-Andi
--
[email protected] -- Speaking for myself only.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:54:50PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:45:25PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 2/14/2012 10:17 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > > ping**5
> > >
> > so.. with Fedora not really submitting oopses anymore, and the box
> > wiped/down from kernel.org... what's the point still ??
>
> Just scanning the mailing lists would be good.
>
> But I assume Fedora may be willing to fix their submission?
I hear Fedora just got a new project leader; maybe it's time to
approach them again?
- Ted
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 05:12:40PM -0500, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:54:50PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:45:25PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On 2/14/2012 10:17 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > > > ping**5
> > > >
> > > so.. with Fedora not really submitting oopses anymore, and the box
> > > wiped/down from kernel.org... what's the point still ??
> >
> > Just scanning the mailing lists would be good.
> >
> > But I assume Fedora may be willing to fix their submission?
>
> I hear Fedora just got a new project leader; maybe it's time to
> approach them again?
$ yum info libreport-plugin-kerneloops
Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks, presto, refresh-packagekit
Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
* fedora: ftp.cse.buffalo.edu
* rpmfusion-free: mirror.hiwaay.net
* rpmfusion-free-updates: mirror.hiwaay.net
* rpmfusion-nonfree: mirror.hiwaay.net
* rpmfusion-nonfree-updates: mirror.hiwaay.net
* updates: mirror.steadfast.net
* updates-testing: mirror.steadfast.net
Installed Packages
Name : libreport-plugin-kerneloops
Arch : x86_64
Version : 2.0.8
Release : 4.fc16
Size : 15 k
Repo : installed
>From repo : updates
Summary : libreport's kerneloops reporter plugin
URL : https://fedorahosted.org/abrt/
License : GPLv2+
Description : This package contains plugin which sends kernel crash information to specified
: server, usually to kerneloops.org.
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 02:35:44PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> Any news now that the fiasco is going to be resolved.
>
> Bastien
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Josh Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Jiri Slaby <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 08/26/2011 08:48 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>> On 8/26/2011 11:47 AM, Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Is the code available somewhere, or will it need to be rewritten ?
> >>>
> >>> we have the code on the server/etc... if someone signs up to help he
> >>> will be on the server of course
> >>
> >> It looks like there are some volunteers. Did you have a chance to talk
> >> to each other and make any progress?
> >>
> >> If not, may we have at least a backup of the database published, please?
> >> There are very valuable data you collected over time and I'm sure there
> >> are more people than me who would appreciate that.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> --
> >> js
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> >> the body of a message to [email protected]
> >> More majordomo info at ?http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >> Please read the FAQ at ?http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >>
> >
> > Apparently kerneoops.org is hosted by kernel.org so there will be no
> > progress until that fiasco is resolved. I'm still up for working on it
> > if and when the site is back online.
> >
> > --
> > Josh
> >
> --
Did anyone ever get access to the kerneloops code and/or is working on a
replacement ?
I see that http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/submitoops.php appears to
accept kerneloops reports, http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/ reports
"http://www.kerneloops.org, coming soon", and a comment in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800302 suggests that Redhat may be
in the process of taking over kerneloops.org.
Thanks,
Guenter
On 6/25/2012 11:05 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> Did anyone ever get access to the kerneloops code and/or is working on a
> replacement ?
>
> I see that http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/submitoops.php appears to
> accept kerneloops reports, http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/ reports
> "http://www.kerneloops.org, coming soon", and a comment in
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800302 suggests that Redhat may be
> in the process of taking over kerneloops.org.
I hope RH is willing to invest the time in this; I do not have access to
the latest code anymore (it lived on the kernel.org servers prior to the
incident)
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:11:12AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 6/25/2012 11:05 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> >
> > Did anyone ever get access to the kerneloops code and/or is working on a
> > replacement ?
> >
> > I see that http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/submitoops.php appears to
> > accept kerneloops reports, http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/ reports
> > "http://www.kerneloops.org, coming soon", and a comment in
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800302 suggests that Redhat may be
> > in the process of taking over kerneloops.org.
>
> I hope RH is willing to invest the time in this; I do not have access to
> the latest code anymore (it lived on the kernel.org servers prior to the
> incident)
>
Maybe we can get some feedback from RH. Anton, can you shed some light about
what is happening, if anything ?
Thanks,
Guenter
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:12:33PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 11:11:12AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 6/25/2012 11:05 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > Did anyone ever get access to the kerneloops code and/or is working on a
> > > replacement ?
> > > I see that http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/submitoops.php appears to
> > > accept kerneloops reports, http://kerneloops-descope.rhcloud.com/ reports
> > > "http://www.kerneloops.org, coming soon", and a comment in
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800302 suggests that Redhat may be
> > > in the process of taking over kerneloops.org.
> > I hope RH is willing to invest the time in this; I do not have access to
> > the latest code anymore (it lived on the kernel.org servers prior to the
> > incident)
> Maybe we can get some feedback from RH. Anton, can you shed some light about
> what is happening, if anything ?
I can't promise, but there will be a person in Red Hat, who will be
working on 'kerneloops.org' starting from middle of next month. I will
update you in a couple weeks whether it happened or not.
I created kerneloops.descope.org with submitoops.php and latest.php
in order to not loose the oopses reports. Also asked Arjan to change the
IP of kerneloops.org's DNS record so that it point to kerneloops.descope.org,
at least temporary, but it didn't happen yet. :(
All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
mentioned before, might help.
Anton.
On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> I created kerneloops.descope.org with submitoops.php and latest.php
> in order to not loose the oopses reports. Also asked Arjan to change the
> IP of kerneloops.org's DNS record so that it point to
I've seen no such request.
On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> mentioned before, might help.
this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
(this was well before the kernel.org issues)
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > mentioned before, might help.
> this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
I was a bit afraid that Fedora was the major contributor. Also I'm
not quite sure why Fedora stopped to submitting the reports, don't
remember we've changed anything in that respect.
thanks,
-
Anton.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > mentioned before, might help.
>
> this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
>
Is this still an issue ? I thought Anton's change was made to the Fedora
package, though I may be wrong. Either case, Anton might have some influence at
Fedora.
Guenter
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:15:59AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > I created kerneloops.descope.org with submitoops.php and latest.php
> > in order to not loose the oopses reports. Also asked Arjan to change the
> > IP of kerneloops.org's DNS record so that it point to
> I've seen no such request.
I used your email at infradead.org ... seems that was the problem.
So, could you update DNS record of *.kerneloops.org to point to 23.20.153.183.
Thank you,
Anton.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:25:58PM +0200, Anton Arapov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > > mentioned before, might help.
> > this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> > kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> > (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
> I was a bit afraid that Fedora was the major contributor. Also I'm
> not quite sure why Fedora stopped to submitting the reports, don't
> remember we've changed anything in that respect.
>
Guess our replies overlapped. If that is in fact the case, can you help to get
it addressed ?
Guenter
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:29:49AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > > mentioned before, might help.
> >
> > this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> > kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> > (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
> Is this still an issue ? I thought Anton's change was made to the Fedora
> package, though I may be wrong. Either case, Anton might have some influence at
> Fedora.
My understanding was - kerneloops.org just shutted down gradually,
it was slow at the beginning and off now. I didn't expect nor know
Fedora stopped reporting.
We are also one step behind putting 'abrt-dump-oops' binary into
kexec-tools to get even more oopses. :)
Anton.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:32:32AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:25:58PM +0200, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > > > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > > > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > > > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > > > mentioned before, might help.
> > > this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> > > kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> > > (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
> > I was a bit afraid that Fedora was the major contributor. Also I'm
> > not quite sure why Fedora stopped to submitting the reports, don't
> > remember we've changed anything in that respect.
> Guess our replies overlapped. If that is in fact the case, can you help to get
> it addressed ?
Absolutely.
> Guenter
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 04:31:35PM +0200, Anton Arapov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 07:29:49AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 06:16:54AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On 6/26/2012 12:14 AM, Anton Arapov wrote:
> > > > All in all, it seems to be optimistic so far, and I hope we will
> > > > have some web gui this summer. Although we don't have much oopses
> > > > reported yet and changing the ip address of kerneloops.org, as
> > > > mentioned before, might help.
> > >
> > > this is the problem indeed. When Fedora stopped submitting oopses to
> > > kerneloops.org, the project became suddenly of much much less value.
> > > (this was well before the kernel.org issues)
> > Is this still an issue ? I thought Anton's change was made to the Fedora
> > package, though I may be wrong. Either case, Anton might have some influence at
> > Fedora.
>
> My understanding was - kerneloops.org just shutted down gradually,
> it was slow at the beginning and off now. I didn't expect nor know
> Fedora stopped reporting.
Maybe it was a combination of factors. I have seen complaints from people that
kerneloops reports did not show up on kerneloops.org, and complaints that fedora
stopped submitting requests. Maybe the system was overloaded at times, or maybe
some default was changed. I noticed that Ubuntu comes with the kerneloops
daemon installed, but that it is disabled by default. Not really helpful, since
many typical Ubuntu user will not even know that it exists in the first place.
Maybe something similar happened with Fedora ?
Either case, I think it would be great to get it working again, and then work
with the main distributions to get reports submitted.
Thanks,
Guenter