Am 14.11.2008 um 03:25 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> Perhaps Apport could be taught to roll the dice and return crash
> reports in
> some fraction of cases post-release (perhaps 5 or 10 percent).
> This would
> help us catch regressions.
I don't see a reason why Apport is automatically switche
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 07:51:53 + "Matthew East" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> I have heard people discuss post-release regressions due to SRU/security
>> updates. I was chatting with another developer last night who sa
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:44:00 +0100 Markus Hitter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Am 14.11.2008 um 03:25 schrieb Scott Kitterman:
>
>> Perhaps Apport could be taught to roll the dice and return crash
>> reports in
>> some fraction of cases post-release (perhaps 5 or 10 percent).
>> This would
>>
Scott Kitterman [2008-11-14 5:46 -0500]:
> I do think if there's a reasonable way to report all crashes from
> -proposed, that would be a good thing.
I agree. With a bit of apt-cache policy magic we can detect this on
the client side.
Problem is that in order to do that, we need to catch the in
pe, 2008-11-14 kello 12:36 +0100, Martin Pitt kirjoitti:
> Problem is that in order to do that, we need to catch the initial
> crash first and write it to disk, i. e. we would get the CPU/IO
> overhead again by default. That alone doesn't worry me too much, but
> it might be an issue in certain env
Scott Kitterman wrote:
> We'd be flooded with stacks of dupes mostly to existing bugs
> and no one to triage, let alone fix them.
In their current form dupes are mostly annoying, but what if the
apport was redesigned so that it had a "production mode" where it
only bumped a counter on the origina
Did you make a bug report?
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:01 PM, richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> Hi all , I've doned the asbestos pants
>
> On an upgrade from 8.04 to 8.10 the symlink from /usr/bin/gcc
> to /usr/bin/gcc-4.3 is not made.
> on a clean install of 8.10 its made.
> I verified it as w
Are you sure that this is the case?
I have the symlink and I just some 2 weeks ago performed the upgrade.
thebluepill:~$ ls -al /usr/bin/gcc
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2008-11-04 21:46 /usr/bin/gcc -> gcc-4.3
The timestamp is also fairly reasonable although i guess an update
could theoretically ha
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:28:56 +0100
Henrik Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you sure that this is the case?
> I have the symlink and I just some 2 weeks ago performed the upgrade.
>
>
> thebluepill:~$ ls -al /usr/bin/gcc
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 2008-11-04 21:46 /usr/bin/gcc -> gcc-4.
Scott Kitterman ha scritto:
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 16:14:31 -0500 Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> I haven't bothered trying to use the GUI with my iwl4965 and WEP. I
>> just expect NM to not work when it comes to WEP.
>
> I have 4965 and it worked fine for me with KNetworkMana
10 matches
Mail list logo
