2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
BUG REPORTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please read this file before sending in a bug report or patch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, PLEASE read the documentation first. 90% of the mail I get
|
|
|
|
|
complaining about procps is due to the sender not having read the
|
|
|
|
|
documentation!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where to send
|
|
|
|
|
=============
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
Send comments, bug reports, patches, etc., to albert@users.sf.net
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What to send
|
|
|
|
|
============
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
It is much more useful to me if a program really crashes to recompile it
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
with make "CC=gcc -ggdb -O", run it with "gdb prog" and "run" and send
|
|
|
|
|
me a stack trace ('bt' command). That said, any bug report is still
|
|
|
|
|
better than none.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
strace and ltrace output are very helpful:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
strace -o output-file ps --blah
|
|
|
|
|
bzip2 output-file
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
It might be nice to get rid of miscellaneous compiler warnings, but
|
|
|
|
|
don't bend over backwards to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kernel-Dependent Patches
|
|
|
|
|
========================
|
|
|
|
|
If you send me patches which are specific to *running* with a particular
|
|
|
|
|
kernel version of /proc, please condition them with the runtime determined
|
|
|
|
|
variable `linux_version_code' from libproc/kvers.c. It is the same
|
|
|
|
|
number as the macro LINUX_VERSION_CODE for which the kernel /proc fs
|
|
|
|
|
code was compiled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A macro is provide in libproc/version.h to construct the code from its
|
|
|
|
|
components, e.g.
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
if (linux_version_code < LINUX_VERSION(2,5,41))
|
|
|
|
|
/* blah blah blah */
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
A startup call to set_linux_version may also be necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, if a bug is due to a change in kernel file formats, it would
|
|
|
|
|
be best to first try to generalize the parsing, since the code is then
|
|
|
|
|
more resilient against future change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also unified diffs (diff -u) are my preference, context diffs (diff -c )
|
|
|
|
|
are kind of usable, and standard diffs (diff) are more useless than a
|
|
|
|
|
generic text description of what you did. Just use
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
diff -Naurd oldfile newfile
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
or
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
diff -Naurd old-procps-dir new-procps-dir
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
to create your diffs and you will make me happy. Also make sure to
|
|
|
|
|
include a description of what the diff is for or I'm likely to ignore
|
|
|
|
|
it because of general lack of time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Code Structure
|
|
|
|
|
==============
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002-10-07 03:04:17 +05:30
|
|
|
A goal is to encapsulate *all* parsing dependent on /proc
|
2002-02-02 04:17:29 +05:30
|
|
|
file formats into the libproc library. If the API is general enough
|
|
|
|
|
it can hopefully stabilize and then /proc changes might only require
|
|
|
|
|
updating libproc.so. Beyond that having the set of utilities be simple
|
|
|
|
|
command lines parsers and output formatters and encapsulating all kernel
|
|
|
|
|
divergence in libproc is the way to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hence if you are submitting a new program or are fixing an old one, keep
|
|
|
|
|
in mind that adding files to libproc which encapsulate such things is
|
|
|
|
|
more desirable than patching the actual driver program. (well, except
|
|
|
|
|
to move it toward the API of the library).
|
