[clug] OT (Debian big report) - was Re: Kubunbtu 10.4

[Scott Ferguson]

On Tue Jun 21 17:07:23 MDT 2011 Felix Karpfen wrote: >
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:20:14 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:18:52 +0000 (UTC) Felix Karpfen wrote:
>> 
>> 

<snipped>

>> 
>> Your reported bug is still open, reset from "critical" to "normal".
>> marked as **"more information needed"**.
>> 
> Thank you for that information; I am "out of my depth" with Debian bug-
> reports :-(.  
> 
> I was under the impression that I had fully answered all the posted 
> requests for additional information.  And scored a deafening silence.
> 
> Felix 

I've quoted:-
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=619521
which shows the history of the (last) bug you reported.

Having never filed a bug report I can't advise. I believe the reason for
reclassifying the severity from critical is that it was:-
not unfixable (a symlink should have overcome the problem)
not reported by anyone else

Your setup is/was complex, unusual, and it would be difficult for me to
upgrade even if I had access to the machine.

Going from my notes:-
Running three operating systems using lilo as a boot loader.
Your were/are using xfs file systems and had a non-default system
comprising a mixture of packages from gnome, kde and other DEs.
You booted from the secondary hdd on the primary IDE controller (hdb).
/dev/hdd had/has 7 partitions. It also had some other potential
difficulties:-
[root at carrot ~]# du -hs /opt
465M    /opt
The debian install you were attempting to upgrade was Lenny. I was
unable to confirm that Lenny was *fully updated* at the time of the upgrade.
The upgrade you were attempting to apply was from the first
(problematic) release DVDs, shortly after a number of critical fixes had
been released (point release 6.0.1).
I had suggested a clean install rather than an upgrade - OR an upgrade
using the net-install cd.
My reasons being that for some of your core packages there was no
upgrade path.

That's not to be taken as a criticism of your unusual setup, rather an
explanation as to why it was likely to be a difficult upgrade.

NOTE: I still recommend that people only use DVD sets to build machines
that have no internet connection. There are over 30000 packages - of
which only a small percentage are ever used. The average desktop user
only installs around 3GB of packages - that's less than one DVD's worth
of applications. Additionally, I cannot think of a time where the DVD
set has not needed upgrading with bug or security patches.

If you are not happy with how your bug report is being handled I'd
suggest you contact the last developer to look at it. See the link at
the start of this post.

Cheers