GTK+ Inspector Gains More Features Ahead Of GNOME 3.16

[TheBlackCat]

Users don't have to manually interpret anything here. Tools like abrt in Fedora automate the process.

Yes, that was my whole point. With tools like that available, why do ordinary users need to dig into a debugger, graphical or otherwise?

[RahulSundaram]

Yes, that was my whole point. With tools like that available, why do ordinary users need to dig into a debugger, graphical or otherwise?

The tools need the debugger to be available by default similar to how a mimimal amount of debug info is built-in for Fedora/RHEL RPM packages for use by the automated tools even though end users are not going to use it directly, they benefit from it being available.

[TheBlackCat]

The tools need the debugger to be available by default similar to how a mimimal amount of debug info is built-in for Fedora/RHEL RPM packages for use by the automated tools even though end users are not going to use it directly, they benefit from it being available.

No, automated tools do not need access to a graphical debugger (by definition). They need access to debug information, but that is not the same thing.

[RahulSundaram]

No, automated tools do not need access to a graphical debugger (by definition). They need access to debug information, but that is not the same thing.

They can access both the debuginfo as well as run through the debugger graphically depending on whether you are capturing a crash or recording an interaction to capture that data. Both are useful for different use cases.