From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tilman Schmidt Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc8: FTP transfer errors Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 01:23:17 +0200 Message-ID: <47FFF2E5.9040807@imap.cc> References: <47FEADCB.7070104@rtr.ca> <20080410.172453.44434205.davem@davemloft.net> <47FEB062.3020003@rtr.ca> <20080410.173911.179180620.davem@davemloft.net> <47FEBDAA.7010305@rtr.ca> <47FF6555.50004@rtr.ca> <20080411143537.GA27874@2ka.mipt.ru> <47FFE33C.1000707@imap.cc> <20080411222536.GA25893@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigA7986C66DA18ED8DFC32FB07" Cc: Mark Lord , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= , David Miller , jesper.juhl@gmail.com, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, Jeff Garzik , rjw@sisk.pl, LKML , Netdev To: Evgeniy Polyakov Return-path: Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:45495 "EHLO out1.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756053AbYDKXXd (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:23:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080411222536.GA25893@2ka.mipt.ru> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigA7986C66DA18ED8DFC32FB07 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:25:36 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 12:16:28AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt (tilman@imap.c= c) wrote: >> So I was right after all? Bug reports from people who (for whatever >> reason, including having to earn their living) cannot do a bisect are >> not welcome? >=20 > You got it wrong. Did I really? Let's see ... > If bug is subtle and developers can not reproduce it, there are only tw= o > ways out of the problem: to help developers or not to help. >=20 > In the latter case bug report is useless (except that to show that it > exists, since practically no one can fix it until some new details > added). Looks like you're saying I was right after all. Useless bug reports shouldn't be submitted. So please answer this simple question: If I know beforehand that I won't have the time to do a bisect (or other similarly time-consuming task the maintainers might ask from me), should I report the bug, or should I keep my knowledge to myself? This question is not theoretical. It's a situation I find myself in quite regularly, because I allow myself the luxury of building most rc kernels and even the odd mm kernel just for fun even though I have a daytime job and a family to feed. It would be quite easy to look the other way if I encounter a problem in one of those, hoping someone else with more time on his or her hands will also come across it and report it. So far my conscience told me not to do that. But if reporting it without being able to follow up on it is considered useless then my conscience was apparently wrong. Just say the word, and I'll stop what I'm doing. I'll have no problem finding other things to do with my time. > Bisection was just an example of the help, reporter can provide. Sure. It's not about bisection specifically, but about the time a reporter is able to invest in addition to what went into the report already. But bisection is is a good example, because it's the most time-consuming of all the tasks routinely asked from bug reporters. > If you can not proceed with what was suggested, then do > not piss anyone off because you were told to do something to help. If a polite "sorry, I don't have the time" already counts as pissing off, the only choice left is to avoid the situation in which I'd have to say that. IOW, don't report bugs if I don't have the time to follow through. Again: if that is what you want, I have no problem with it. > If you go to the doctor because of aching throat and he asks you to > open a mouth, you will not blame him for asking you to do that. That analogy is wrong on so many accounts. It is not my throat that's aching. A doctor would not insult me for not wanting to open my mouth but rather ask if there was perhaps a valid reason for that. Not to mention that opening my mouth takes substantially less time than a Linux kernel bisection ... A better analogy would be if I see an object lying on the highway, and I stop at the next service area to call the police and alert them about the possible danger. If they'd ask me to drive back to the place where I saw it in order to describe precisely where it lay and what it looked like, I think I might indeed become a bit upset. HTH T. PS: I'll shut my big mouth now. The topic has been beaten to death. --------------enigA7986C66DA18ED8DFC32FB07 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH//LwQ3+did9BuFsRAkCOAJ0criWknfNgcuWBFsN/4piArg8mzgCeO6zf kOBtgl8qybMb7Q9L8HfHYIg= =hquZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigA7986C66DA18ED8DFC32FB07--