Forthcoming FC4 kernel update, more testing required. [ I think it's broken. ]

[Matthew Saltzman]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Jeff Vian wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 16:36 -0400, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
>>
>>> I've been having trouble with kernel version 2.6.12-1.1456_FC4, so I
>>> downloaded 2.6.13-1.1525_FC4 and tried it.  It seems to be broken in the
>>> same way, namely:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> More info available on request.
>>
>> File a bug.  I don't think the maintainers will follow up with you based
>> on your report here.  As Red Hatters have repeated often on these lists:
>> If it's not in Bugzilla, it's not a bug.
>>
> That may be true Matt, but as Dave said just before you sent this, Jon's
> problem is likely an issue with X and not with the kernel. I would say
> the same considering the timing of the problem.  More tests and
> information are needed to narrow it down though.
>
> Sometimes things do get resolved without a bugzilla, especially cases
> where it is a configuration or user issue.
>
> In all cases you have to look at the actual problem, not the perception.
> If it is X the bug would go against X.  If it is a kernel issue the bug
> goes against the kernel.  If it is a driver problem the bug goes against
> the driver. Identifying the actual problem is better than just a blanket
> statement something like "My PC won't boot since I did an update".
>
> The more the user can do to narrow down the problem source the quicker
> it can be identified and fixed.  Often the best help is to assist in
> ways to identify the actual location of the problem.  Then, if
> appropriate, file a bug against the proper package.

Fair enough--in fact I agree 100%.  I read the OP's "more information on 
request" as being addressed to potential fixers of a bug he believed he 
had isolated.  Maybe it just caught me in a momentary bout of impatience.

-- 
 		Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs