Re: Filing bug reports in Debian (was Re: Debian Stole My Name!)
On Wednesday 15 October 2008, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
> Denvid Wright escreveu:
> > On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> >> WARNING: YOU HAVE A LOCKED AND LOADED ASSAULT RIFLE POINTED AT
> >> YOUR FEET AND YOUR FINGER IS ON THE TRIGGER.
> >
> > Interesting analogy, but it doesn't work, for several reasons.
> > First, it's quite possible to remove your finger from the trigger,
> > or to just say, "I won't pull the trigger and that solves the whole
> > problem." Honestly, there's a good chance that's what I did. As
> > I've said, this was 2 years ago and I just don't remember it that
> > clearly.
> >
> > If you say I have a gun pointed at my feet and my finger is on the
> > trigger, then I can make a choice: Do I pull the trigger or not?
> > In this case, without warning, apt or aptitude pulls the trigger,
> > WITHOUT WARNING.
>
> In my view the trigger is pulled when you edit portions of the file
> that shouldn't be changed unless special precautions are taken (such
> as disabling update-grub). It's true the effect is only seen later,
> but the danger lies in editing the automatically changed sections,
> not in running update-grub, even if it is that what causes the actual
> effects to be seen.
>
> > That's a critical point: The file was overwritten without my
> > knowing or without so much as a warning. The warning in menu.lst
> > says:
> >
> > ## lines between the AUTOMAGIC KERNELS LIST markers will be
> > modified ## by the debian update-grub script except for the default
> > options below
> >
> > Notice it does NOT say when update-grub is run. It does NOT say,
> > "apt will overwrite this list when the kernel is upgraded." With
> > the warning given, unless someone has a technical understanding of
> > apt, they have no reason to anticipate it overwriting menu.lst.
>
> The warning could be better worded, and a direct warning at the top
> of the file such as
> # WARNING: Be careful when editing this file.
> # Some parts of it can be changed automatically.
> # See <manpages and other references> for more details.
>
> could be added. Going back to the original discussion (I think I'll
> regret saying that, but I can't avoid), that would suggest a wishlist
> bug.
>
> More than that, we may be dealing with exaggerated precautions. If
> warnings are given, it's the user responsibility to know what he is
> doing and what he is changing in the file.
Both of your comments involve disagreements over differences of
opinion -- but I can see where you're coming from and I think the point
about rewording the warnings in menu.lst would go a long way toward
addressing the issue that led me to file the bug report.
If filing the bug report had led to that kind of discussion, I would
have felt much better about it than I did when I decided to just give
up. I can deal with a disagreement. What I found frustrating was that
it felt like the focus was only on justifying why the bug was elsewhere
and there was no need to pursue it.
Hal
Reply to: