Re: memory problem
- To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: memory problem
- From: Kamaraju S Kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:20:07 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] gjooan$crl$1@ger.gmane.org>
- References: <20081227125907.GT17090@prunille.vinc17.org> <49562F66.3040106@gmail.com> <20081227233803.GL4080@swansys> <20081228010144.GY17090@prunille.vinc17.org> <40bca5f30812311037m4a152f63x3cd1a55a81d94253@mail.gmail.com> <495BBD90.3020701@pobox.com> <20081231230046.GA3331@blitz.hooton> <495BFE5E.2020401@pobox.com> <20081231234149.GA4691@blitz.hooton> <[🔎] 495C1AEF.30501@pobox.com>
Ken Teague wrote:
> Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
>> Well, there are already many memory-related bugs. See esp 452706. The
>> complainer was running out with more than 1 GB of memory. The suggested
>> action was to try FF3 in experimental.
>
> Ouch. That has to be the poorest answer I've ever seen from a Debian
> developer... ever. In bugs I've submitted and seen submitted, the
> developer would either take the issue up with upstream or fix the
> problem themselves. I think it isn't right for a Debian developer to
> suggest a package from experimental to be installed on a stable box to
> solve a problem with a package from stable.
I think the maintainer is just trying to find the cause of the memory build
up. He is trying to narrow down the problem. He is not suggesting shifting
stable users to experimental as a long term solution. Conside for example,
another user reading the same bug report and running experimental.He might
be willing to take up the task. I personally do not see anything wrong with
the maintainer's response.
raju
--
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/
Reply to: