| 1 |
On Monday 08 September 2003 17:18, Kumba wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > So, does this mean I should file a bug report for all the packages I've |
| 4 |
> > been unable to compile with gcc331 (if not listed already)? Some I've got |
| 5 |
> > patches for - file those too? Should I have done this already? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Yeah, assign them to gcc-porting@g.o. I'm on that alias, |
| 8 |
> although if any of the patches involves X applications, I won't be of |
| 9 |
> much help (don't run X, so can't easily test them). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Almost all packages work now. The only two that didn't are gnomemm (already |
| 12 |
filed - FIXLATER) and arson (simple fix). I haven't tested openoffice yet - |
| 13 |
will do tonight. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I read through the bug-posting guidelines before posting and have a few things |
| 16 |
I'd like to clarify, though. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
1) Unless the bug is obviously high or low priority, is it fine to leave it at |
| 19 |
P2? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
2) If an existing bug report touches on another bug that hasn't been solved |
| 22 |
but the report is marked as fixed, should a new one be filed for the other |
| 23 |
bug? See #28227. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
3) It is my understanding that all bugs should be submitted to bugs.gentoo.org |
| 26 |
and they will be pushed upstream if necessary. Is this correct? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
4) Somebody's signature in the forums is "feature requests are bugs..." Is |
| 29 |
this in relation to Gentoo-specific things (portage, livecds, etc.) or does |
| 30 |
it include upstream packages too? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I'm always hesitant to report bugs as I don't want to waste anybody's time. |
| 33 |
Perhaps, after a few more bug reports I'll become more confident that I'm |
| 34 |
doing something useful... |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Regards, |
| 37 |
Jason |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives