[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

random comments and requests for information

First, could someone tell me what NMU stands for?  I see it on bug reports
and other debian places.

Second, while the posting to "Lazarus Long" was very funny, please take it
easy.  I mean, remarks like "you are deeply confused" (that was directed at
my comments about adding drivers to the install process) can be taken the
wrong way!  By the way, I'm sure I am deeply confused, but I reread the
fine install manuals, and it didn't provide any additional clues about how
to slip drivers in.  The install manual says there's this one big file (or
set of floppies) and to use it; there's no guidance about screwing around
with it.  Secondly, I was thinking of using the drivers before I got to
that point--specifically, my drivers file was on an NTFS partition on my
first run through the install.

Anyway, back to LL:  In at least one case, it seems he hit a real bug, but
filed it under the wrong package (I say this because I think I hit the same
one; I hope I got the right package).  So the error reports may not have
been as off-the-wall as they appeared.  Well, yes, he should provide
additional info.

When I started testing, I had no idea what the different programs were that
were running under different parts of the install.  I used boot-floppies as
my all purpose Package for bugs, just as LL seems to have used base-config.
 Remember, it's not so clear from the outside what's going on.  Also, there
seem to be various "fake" or "light" versions of things at different stages
(for example, a fake shell, a fake vi ), which makes things even tricker.

Third, is there a standard way to capture errors?  During most of the
install things just sail by.  And then afterwards, when I run (for example)
dpkg and get lots of complaints (something about perl), I'd like something
better to put in a bug report (that is, better than "something about
perl").  I thought (hoped?) that errors go to some standard place (at least
on a per-package basis), but I don't know if that's true.

Otherwise, I notice some programs (e.g., dpkg ) have an option to be
non-interactive enough to capture the output.

Fourth, thanks to everyone who's working on this.  I know it's harder to
fix bugs than find them.

Reply to: