Re: unreproducable, but grave bug
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 06:33, Scott Dier wrote:
> * Brian May <bam@debian.org> [011024 20:47]:
> > Is it OK to close a bug just because it is un-reproducible?
>
> Yes.
I have closed such bug reports when the submitter doesn't answer direct
requests for more information. But you should not close a bug report because
you can't reproduce it if the submitter is still asserting that it occurs for
them. If nothing else the BTS may put several users who experience the bug
in contact with each other and they may be able to discover the cause when
working together (it's happened for me).
> I believe either that the dataset is bad somehow (isamchk?) or that
> you have a special-case that is more an upstream related issue and not a
> strict packaging issue.
It's still a bug.
On several occasions I have filed bug reports against my own packages because
of upstream bugs. There is still an open bug report that I filed against
LILO regarding software RAID support.
I file bug reports against my own packages for several reasons:
So I don't forget about them - if I get enough spare time I'll fix the bug
and send the patch upstream.
So other users of the package can see what the bug is and not waste their
time trying to track it down. Also users will know it's a known bug and not
bother sending bug reports to me or the upstream maintainer as we already
know about it.
So anyone who wants to assist with development of the package can see a list
of things that need to be done.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: