Re: Dedicated kernel bug database

[Eli Carter]

Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:48:16AM -0600, Eli Carter wrote:
[snip]
>  > >It could warn the user if they attach an un-decoded oops that their
>  > >bug report isn't as useful as it could be, and if they mention a
>  > >distribution kernel version, that it's not a tree that the developers
>  > >will necessarily be familiar with
>  > Perhaps a more generalized hook into bugzilla for 'validating' a bug 
>  > report, then code specific validators for kernel work?
> 
> Its a nice idea, but I think it's a lot of effort to get it right,
> when a human can look at the dump, realise its not decoded, and
> send a request back in hardly any time at all.
> I also don't trust things like this where if something goes wrong,
> we could lose the bug report. People are also more likely to ping-pong
> ,argue or "how do I..." with a human than they are with an automated robot.

Either way, it isn't kernel specific.... which is what I was trying to 
address.  If it is valuable (which as you demonstrate is debatable,) 
then it is valuable in bugzilla baseline, not just kernel-bugzilla.

Eli
--------------------. "If it ain't broke now,
Eli Carter           \                  it will be soon." -- crypto-gram
eli.carter(a)inet.com `-------------------------------------------------