From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: thoughts on DPDK after a few days of reading sources Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:20:57 +0100 Message-ID: <7111981.Y5bUDIndo6@xps13> References: <20160211030540.GB25680@hunt> <2593509.xiuDro8IbH@xps13> <56BCB340.6040208@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Dave Neary Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DDFBCE7 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:22:26 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id g62so28359859wme.0 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:22:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56BCB340.6040208@redhat.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-02-11 11:13, Dave Neary: > Hi, > > On 02/11/2016 02:58 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-02-10 19:05, Seth Arnold: > > [...] > >> It's nearly impossible to solve issues without error reporting. Good > >> error reporting saves admins time and money. > > > > Until now, the errors were reported on the list and most often fixed quickly. > > While I agree we need a more formal process (a bug tracker), I think we must > > be noticed of new bugs on the mailing list. > > Since nobody was against the bugzilla proposal, a deployment will be planned. > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-August/023012.html > > I may have misunderstood Seth's comment, but it looked like he was > talking about checking errno after fopen and reporting the error with > perror or strerror in the event of a non-zero return. Maybe I misunderstood his comments. Anyway, after looking at his list of bugs, it appears that a bug tracker would be useful :)