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

Bug#1002906: marked as done (reportbug should give a hint on how to check if a bug is still available in a newer release of a package)

Your message dated Tue, 4 Jan 2022 20:09:45 +0100
with message-id <f5c6b1e7-e9a4-6371-0a2d-96df093a524f@web.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#1002906: reportbug should give a hint on how to check if a bug is still available in a newer release of a package
has caused the Debian Bug report #1002906,
regarding reportbug should give a hint on how to check if a bug is still available in a newer release of a package
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1002906: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1002906
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: reportbug
Version: 7.10.3+deb11u1
Severity: wishlist

Dear Maintainer,

   * What led up to the situation?
When I ran "reportbug ifupdown-extra" because of a wrong systemd service
file it provides that I ran into after upgrading from debian 10 to
debian 11, reportbug told me newer release(s) were already available in
testing and unstable and I should verify whether or not the bug still
exists there. However reportbug didn't tell me how to do this.

   * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
     ineffective)?
I searched for a while to find a way to access the source of
ifupdown-extra.

   * What was the outcome of this action?
I finally found the source of the package after a searching on
packages.debian.org

   * What outcome did you expect instead?
reportbug should point me to the correct place directly, like in this
case for example to
https://packages.debian.org/source/bookworm/ifupdown-extra for the new
release in testing.
A more novice user wouldn't have been able to verify if the bug he is
about to report was already fixed because he would be lost how to find
the source.


-- Package-specific info:
** Environment settings:
EDITOR="/usr/bin/vim"
PAGER="less"
INTERFACE="text"

** /home/thomas/.reportbugrc:
reportbug_version "7.5.3~deb10u1"
mode standard
ui text
email "jean-luc@picard.franken.de"

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 11.2
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-10-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages reportbug depends on:
ii  apt                2.2.4
ii  python3            3.9.2-3
ii  python3-reportbug  7.10.3+deb11u1
ii  sensible-utils     0.0.14

reportbug recommends no packages.

Versions of packages reportbug suggests:
pn  claws-mail                      <none>
ii  debconf-utils                   1.5.77
ii  debsums                         3.0.2
ii  dlocate                         1.07+nmu1
pn  emacs-bin-common                <none>
ii  file                            1:5.39-3
ii  gnupg                           2.2.27-2
ii  postfix [mail-transport-agent]  3.5.6-1+b1
ii  python3-urwid                   2.1.2-1
pn  reportbug-gtk                   <none>
ii  xdg-utils                       1.1.3-4.1

Versions of packages python3-reportbug depends on:
ii  apt                2.2.4
ii  file               1:5.39-3
ii  python3            3.9.2-3
ii  python3-apt        2.2.1
ii  python3-debian     0.1.39
ii  python3-debianbts  3.1.0
ii  python3-requests   2.25.1+dfsg-2
ii  sensible-utils     0.0.14

python3-reportbug suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 31.12.2021 14.59, Thomas Köhler wrote:
> reportbug told me newer release(s) were already available in
> testing and unstable and I should verify whether or not the bug still
> exists there. However reportbug didn't tell me how to do this.

> reportbug should point me to the correct place directly, like in this
> case for example to
> https://packages.debian.org/source/bookworm/ifupdown-extra for the new
> release in testing.
> A more novice user wouldn't have been able to verify if the bug he is
> about to report was already fixed because he would be lost how to find
> the source.

Thank you for the report. However, I don't think there is much we can do
on the reportbug side, therefore I'm closing the bug.

The trouble is that there is no single correct place to point to. There
are too many ways how to do the verification, and finding the best way
depends on a lot of knowledge about the package, the bug, and the user's
specific situation and prior knowledge. Whatever reportbug would try to
guess here would be wrong most of the time and likely to confuse the
user even more.

Perhaps a wiki page might be a better place to provide user guidance on
this issue? There would be enough space there to cover a few different
options.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: