| 1 |
Miroslav Rovis <miro.rovis@××××××××××××××.hr> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 170225-09:19-0500, Harry Putnam wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Setup: VBox vm running gentoo(amd64) guest on a win-10 (64bit) host |
| 5 |
>> Hardware: HP xw8600 - 2x Xeon CPU X5450 @ 3.00GHz - 32 GB ram |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
> [ some cca. 80k text cut here ] |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Go for the guides, in which you will find that sending 5.5M log in an |
| 10 |
> email is plain wrong. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Pretty dim not to have thought of that... thanks. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
So do you recommend posting something like that online? I wasn't |
| 15 |
kidding when I said I could not determine what the log might mean, |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Do you think there is really any chance a prospective helpful reader |
| 18 |
will follow a hyperlink to these massive logs and actually try to see |
| 19 |
what is going on? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I've decided to first work out a regex that will allow me to clean the |
| 22 |
darn things up... get all those escape sequences out and then post |
| 23 |
them on my web pages. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Read e.g. how to post bugs on Bugzilla. shouldn't be hard to find. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Now, I've often wondered about the question of when to go to the bug |
| 28 |
lists. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
At my very low skill level chances are good that my problem is |
| 31 |
actually some kind of pilot error. So, I think it makes sense to first |
| 32 |
try to determine if there is really a bug at all. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Those folks that work on bugs can't be very tickled to get piles of |
| 35 |
data that is really about some simple minded pilot error. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Seems to me, something should go thru the list a bit first before |
| 38 |
hitting the bug setup... No? Many folks here will know a bug when they |
| 39 |
see it, I'm not one of them. |
Archives