minidump_stackwalk should accept input from stdin

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It would be cool if minidump_stackwalk would accept input from stdin, maybe
by specifying '-' for the input filename.  Since processing is likely to
occur either a) from a CGI or b) pulling the minidump from a database, it's
silly to have to write the dump data out to a tempfile just to have
minidump_stackwalk read it back in.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by ted.mielczarek on 4 Oct 2006 at 7:13

[GoogleCodeExporter]

google_airbag::Minidump requires randomly seekable input.  We'd need to read 
stdin
into a temporary file and then clean up after ourselves.  We could do that in 
the
tool itself, but it's the same thing that you'd do if you were calling the tool.

Actually, minidump_stackwalk is a testing and debugging aid, I hadn't 
considered that
anyone would hook it up as-is in production.  It doesn't know or care about 
symbol
files, for example.  We're expecting that users who want the real deal for
stackwalking will use the MinidumpProcessor API.

Benjamin and I mentioned a few options on airbag-discuss for eliminating 
temporary
files when everything lives in a database.  None of them will really help you 
read
from stdin without a temporary file, but if your dumps are in a database, we 
could
organize things so that you could provide some object other than a filename to 
the
Minidump constructor.  I suggested an input object, and Benjamin proposed a 
pointer
to memory; considering some of the internal architecture, I think an input 
object
would be better.

If you haven't seen that thread yet, take a look.  It's the "uses of files" 
thread. 
Let us know what would and wouldn't work for you.

Original comment by mmento...@gmail.com on 4 Oct 2006 at 8:17

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Feel free to WONTFIX this.

Original comment by ted.mielczarek on 6 Oct 2006 at 12:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'm not WONTFIXing this yet - we should come to some sort of consensus on the 
"uses
of files" thing.  If you've got anything to add or request, it's probably best 
to ask
on airbag-discuss.  We want to make things easy for you and other users of the
processor library.

Original comment by mmento...@gmail.com on 18 Oct 2006 at 1:49

• Added labels: Component-Processor

[GoogleCodeExporter]

If someone really wants this, reopen or refile, but based on the lack of 
discussion,
I'm assuming that nobody really cares.

Original comment by mmento...@gmail.com on 31 May 2007 at 3:55

• Changed state: WontFix