FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-22-2011, 02:55 PM
Detlef Lechner
 
Default Bugzilla versus ubuntu-bug: Why are there necessary 2 programs?

Hi,
on my Maverick computer sometimes an error message appears saying I
should direct to Bugzilla. Usually it asks me to install additional
packages so that a more meaningful output will be produced.

Why have the Ubuntu maintainers provided this mechanism in addition to
the ubuntu-bug mechanism? Both mechanisms seem to cover almost the same
task. What is the most important difference between the two mechanisms?

Regards,
Detlef Lechner
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 01-22-2011, 03:52 PM
C de-Avillez
 
Default Bugzilla versus ubuntu-bug: Why are there necessary 2 programs?

On 01/22/2011 09:55 AM, Detlef Lechner wrote:
> Hi,
> on my Maverick computer sometimes an error message appears saying I
> should direct to Bugzilla. Usually it asks me to install additional
> packages so that a more meaningful output will be produced.

Usually this option is unset (but I did not look very carefully at
the desktop flavour on Maverick): upstream (I *guess* you are
talking about Gnome, but this apply to all upstreams, except KDE)
would rather have bugs reported *on* the distribution and, after
weeding out distro-related problems, upstreamed.

OTOH, you might be talking about KDE -- in other words, *K*Ubuntu.
The Kubuntu flavour has a different requirement: all crashers are to
be reported directly upstream. In this case, yes, you will need the
debug symbols packages also installed.

> Why have the Ubuntu maintainers provided this mechanism in addition to
> the ubuntu-bug mechanism? Both mechanisms seem to cover almost the same
> task. What is the most important difference between the two mechanisms?

The Ubuntu maintainers do not provide this mechanism -- bug-buddy is
usually disabled. The Kubuntu maintainers do.

Cheers,

..C..

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 01-22-2011, 05:56 PM
Detlef Lechner
 
Default Bugzilla versus ubuntu-bug: Why are there necessary 2 programs?

On Sat, 2011-01-22 at 10:52 -0600, C de-Avillez wrote:

> Usually this option is unset (but I did not look very carefully at
> the desktop flavour on Maverick): upstream (I *guess* you are
> talking about Gnome, but this apply to all upstreams, except KDE)
> would rather have bugs reported *on* the distribution and, after
> weeding out distro-related problems, upstreamed.
>
> OTOH, you might be talking about KDE -- in other words, *K*Ubuntu.
> The Kubuntu flavour has a different requirement: all crashers are to
> be reported directly upstream. In this case, yes, you will need the
> debug symbols packages also installed.
>
> > Why have the Ubuntu maintainers provided this mechanism in addition to
> > the ubuntu-bug mechanism? Both mechanisms seem to cover almost the same
> > task. What is the most important difference between the two mechanisms?
>
> The Ubuntu maintainers do not provide this mechanism -- bug-buddy is
> usually disabled. The Kubuntu maintainers do.

Thank you.
Detlef
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:03 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org