lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: MPlayer broken under 2.6.15-rc7-rt1?
    From
    Date

    >
    > DO YOU REALLY PREFER USERS NOT REPORT BUGS?

    It is better to not have any reports than to have "bad" bugreports (bad
    in the sense that they are caused by external kernel components), that
    much is obvious, since such reports cost a lot of time from the
    developers, time that could better be spent on "real" bugs. Often you
    can deal with 3 real bugs in the time it takes to find out that a
    bugreport is really a "bad" one (because you end up looking for things
    that aren't there compared to things that are there and usually are
    found quicker).

    So the question is, are all tainted bugreports bad bugreports. The
    answer again is simple, "no, not all". However, many are. So where to
    draw the line?
    A rather good line is "is it reproducable without the external
    components"; if it is, then it's clearly a non-bad report (and the
    non-tainted reproducer means the developer even has a chance to try it
    during debugging). If it's not, there is a pretty high chance that it's
    a "bad" report; this from my experience of being on the receiving end of
    a distros bugreporting system for a long time. If the reported can't or
    can't be bothered to reproduce it, the developer spending time on it is
    generally a waste of time.

    What you have here is a bit of a gray area; you're using one of the
    maybe-illegal binary modules that has a really long history of
    introducing bugs that, just from the oops, may appear unrelated to this
    module, and you can't reproduce it without. Just not because the bug
    won't happen, but because you state that the application that triggers
    it won't run without it. In this case, someone else apparently reported
    the same issue but without external influences, so it looks like a real
    bug. But we only know that because someone else saw it, not because of
    your report...

    So getting back to your question:
    I would say that I think it's generally better that bugs that cannot be
    reproduced on an untainted kernel are not reported on lkml, but reported
    to the vendor of the tainting module instead, simply because it's very
    likely that it'll waste precious debug time. (debugging isn't the most
    favorite task developers do, having it be a waste of time only makes it
    more so)



    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-01-01 12:29    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean