mrunge at matthias-runge.de
Thu Nov 4 10:46:27 UTC 2010
On 04/11/10 04:23, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 22:12 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 21:02 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>>>> Maybe it is time to discuss the usefulness of ABRT to Fedora. I think
>>>>>> that it is a great idea for commercial products such as RHEL, but it
>>>>>> obviously did not fit Fedora as is.
>>>>> I disagree. I have seen many bugs fixed with the aid of abrt feedback.
>>>>> It beats the hell out of a bug report which says 'it crashed'.
>>>> Does it compare to this number? (it takes a while to open)
>>> Not hard to run the numbers. There've been 31,603 bugs reported to
>>> Bugzilla by abrt. There are 2,216 bugs reported by abrt that have been
>>> closed as CURRENTRELEASE, RAWHIDE, ERRATA or NEXTRELEASE (which are the
>>> resolutions that usually imply 'it got fixed'). I think a tool that's
>>> resulted in 2,216 fixes for crasher bugs is pretty cool. :)
>> I am pretty sure a subset of these closed bugs are "mass-closing" of
>> bugs when a maintainer updates the software. Sometimes, when you
>> forward the report upstream, they don't understand the output either,
>> and say "it may be fixed, just update and try". You update the
>> software, put it to testing, and ask the user if it is fixed for him.
>> The user doesn't respond as usual. Then you mark it as fixed without
>> really knowing what's going on. Then you have such statistics. YAY!
> I randomly picked 20 bug reports out of those 2,216 that were closed
> CURRENTRELEASE, RAWHIDE, ERRATA or NEXTRELEASE.
> 1 had the software patched, and updated (Good fix)
> 2 had some sort of discussion (1-2 messages) before the maintainer
> updates the software and marks it fixed
> 17 had no conversation at all. The maintainer just updates the
> software to the next version.
> Of course some of these might be real fixes. I didn't look deeply into it.
> However, believing that these bugs are "fixed" thanks to the ABRT
> reports sounds to me like wishful thinking.
I am aware of at least two bugs filed from me via abrt, which were
fixed because of the report. I'm pretty sure, I did not file hundreds or
thousands of abrt-reports.
Maybe your perspective is a bit too negative.
More information about the devel