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

Bug#67771: modconf or not?

Martin Schulze <joey@finlandia.Infodrom.North.DE> writes:

> Didn't I say whiptail?  Why are you reassigning it to modconf?

Sorry, brain fart.

> Please investigate the problem instead of reassigning blindly.

Sometimes I just refile w/o investigating but its better for me to
process 20 bugs and have a little inaccuracy every now and then than
just study 1 bug and deal with it.

> The bug has some connection to the boot-floppies since it happens
> through the boot-floppies/base-system.  Something is different
> with whiptaill when using the root.bin and using base2_2.tgz.
> Both is under control of boot-floppies.

If whiptail isn't working under the base system, that seems pretty
clearly to be a whiptail bug.

> Before reassigning next time, please prove that the bug is in the
> package reassigned to.

See above. You don't have  preach to me about bug etiquette.  I've
done a *lot* of bug management in the boot-floppies, and I don't think
you can generally accuse me of being sloppy.

> I'd still call it critical and we have to deal with it, people
> aren't able to use modconf *after* installation.  This is a showstopper.

I still think it should be reassigned against whiptail....  I don't
know what boot-floppies could be doing to cause the problem...

I've cc'd the whiptail maintainer for comments.

.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

Reply to: