Ubuntu-bugsquad Digest, Vol 86, Issue 12

Mon Aug 19 12:03:13 UTC 2013

Am 19.08.2013 14:00, schrieb ubuntu-bugsquad-request at lists.ubuntu.com:
> Send Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list submissions to
> 	ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	ubuntu-bugsquad-request at lists.ubuntu.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	ubuntu-bugsquad-owner at lists.ubuntu.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Ubuntu-bugsquad digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Re: Bug Squad and a lot of asks to update BIOS (Phil Wyett)
>     2. Re: An invalidated bug. Should it have really been
>        invalidated? (Phil Wyett)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 05:41:28 +0100
> From: Phil Wyett <one.ukit at gmail.com>
> To: "ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com"
> 	<ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com>
> Subject: Re: Bug Squad and a lot of asks to update BIOS
> Message-ID: <1376887288.5343.3.camel at u-k-i-t-yoda>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 11:51 -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 06:37:10AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2013-08-10 at 11:56 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>>>> * Phil Wyett (one.ukit at gmail.com) wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it now policy with certain bugs, for the user to be asked to update
>>>>> their BIOS? It seems to happening a heck of a lot these days. With the
>>>>> inherent danger of BIOS updates and that Ubuntu (Linux for Human Beings)
>>>>> has users that are not that technically minded or would shy away from
>>>>> such an update - Should it being happening so often?
>>>> Yeh I've had a few of those - and I agree it's dangerous.
>>>> There are bugs that might very well be fixed by a new BIOS,
>>>> but it does need some careful consideration.
>>>>
>>>> Dave
>>>>
>>> Dangerous I agree and often a point of fear with users. It would be nice
>>> if people doing this on bug reports could add a note.
>>>
>>> "Please do not feel pressured or required to perform the suggested BIOS
>>> update yourself if you are not comfortable with doing so. You may wish
>>> to consult a local I.T. professional, who can advise and possibly
>>> perform such an update for you in exchange for a fee."
>>>
>>> Or something like that... :-)
>> That sounds like a good suggestion to me, what packages / bugs have seen
>> the comments to update your BIOS on?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Brian Murray
> There are so many instances it would be hard to name 1. My email for the
> 'ubuntu-bugs' list goes back to 2013-07-28 and there are > 300 instances
> of BIOS update requests to users if I do a search for the string "update
> is available for your BIOS".
>
> Regards
>
> Phil
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 836 bytes
> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
> URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20130819/4eccabd5/attachment-0001.pgp>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 05:44:18 +0100
> From: Phil Wyett <one.ukit at gmail.com>
> To: ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com
> Subject: Re: An invalidated bug. Should it have really been
> 	invalidated?
> Message-ID: <1376887458.5343.5.camel at u-k-i-t-yoda>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 12:13 -0700, Brian Murray wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 06:13:09AM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2013-08-10 at 14:23 -0400, Chris Johnston wrote:
>>>> I'm not going to comment on keeping the bug opened or closed, however
>>>> I will point out:
>>>> "Many Linux package, hardware, and other non-user space bugs are
>>>> hardware dependent on both the hardware itself, and what other
>>>> hardware the problematic hardware is connected to. The rule of thumb
>>>> is one report, per person, per hardware combination, per bug. For more
>>>> on this please see here, and further below in this article. As well,
>>>> please do not post comments to another person's report, claiming you
>>>> have the same problem, because you have the same hardware, or same
>>>> computer model. Instead, please file a separate report, and make
>>>> comments there. This is because no one can verify if you would have
>>>> the same problem or not, because your hardware can not be analyzed. "
>>>> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs#Bug_reporting_etiquette
>>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have read the whole document now after not reading it for a few years.
>>> It seems many changes and caveats have been introduced and now we have
>>> many flaws in the whole bug reporting process. What should be a simple
>>> process for new/inexperienced users (not me as a dev), has actually
>>> turned into a spiders web of iffy software and processes to perform the
>>> overall task with the addition of many 'do nots' introduced by
>>> contributors.
>>>
>>> Is there anyway the bug squad can hold a review in conjunction with the
>>> quality people and look at the whole process once more? As one example
>>> to why. If the whole notion of one bug per person per hardware combo and
>>> no posting to others reports is the way to go. We should really be using
>>> the duplication method on launchpad and the " This bug affects 'x'
>>> people. Does this bug affect you? Edit" with this affecting bug heat is
>>> essentially redundant.
>> Could you elaborate on what you mean by the last two sentences here?
>>
>> Keep in mind there is a distinction between packages which are generally
>> hardware specific (the kernel, X packages) and those that are generally
>> not like update-manager and Ubuntu Software Center.
>>
>> --
>> Brian Murray
>> Ubuntu Bug Master
>>
> I am looking at the flow of launchpad for bugs at the moment. I will
> hopefully be able to better explain and offer opinion soon.
>
> Regards
>
> Phil
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 836 bytes
> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
> URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20130819/1f75bbe5/attachment-0001.pgp>
>
> ------------------------------
>