Re: Help filing bug report; can't use automated tool, does this report look OK?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/18/08 20:07, s. keeling wrote:
> Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>:
>> On 07/17/08 10:44, Arthur A wrote:
>>> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>>> Why can't you use reportbug?
>>> Thanks, as for why, I'm not entirely sure. It gets setup ok, seems to
>>> run fine, but it always fails at the end before even trying to send the
>>> report. I can sometimes find a temporary file with the report, but
>>> sometimes not.
>> Send the contents of your ~/.reportbugrc file.
>>
>> For example:
>> $ grep -v \# ~/.reportbugrc
>> reportbug_version "3.17"
>> mode standard
>> ui text
>> email "ron.l.johnson@cox.net"
>> smtphost "smtp.east.cox.net"
>
> That's so ancient!?! You're a dinosaur! :-) [inside joke].
Why thank you! But that's just the version I started using rb at.
But actually, I'm rather current.
$ reportbug --version
reportbug 3.41
>
> (0) phreaque /home/keeling_ grep -v \# ~/.reportbugrc
> reportbug_version "3.31"
> mode standard
> ui text
> realname "s. keeling"
> email "keeling@nucleus.com"
>
>>> More than likely I'm doing something wrong, but rather than spend time
>>> figuring it out I figure it would be easier to just gather the info myself.
>> That's... well, that's the Windows Way.
>
> It's the (l)user way. We should always be trying to find a way for
> the machine to do the heavy lifting. That way, we'll have more time
> to think, and room to breath. Between all of us, we've handed him the
> solution on a silver platter. It should be a matter config tweaks and
> tests. I know, (l)users don't do that sort of thing, but we can hope.
Be nice. Not everyone was able to cut their teeth on UNIX V6.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkiBTqgACgkQS9HxQb37XmcscgCcDjX1mG2RAZT95r8mfOyK2a9g
B6IAoO4HAK/LOpOHo8feFpdJCbR1XzR0
=AWuv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: