Daniel Leidert wrote: > tags 482140 + unreproducible > thanks > > Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 22:29 +0200 schrieb Luk Claes: >> Daniel Leidert wrote: >>> Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 17:36 +0000 schrieb Debian Bug Tracking >>> System: >>>> Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: >>>> >>>>> tags 482140 - unreproducible >>>> Bug#482140: docbook-xml: Package does not install: update-xmlcatalog: >>>> error: entity already registered >>>> Tags were: help unreproducible >>>> Tags removed: unreproducible >>> Would you be so kind to explain, why you removed the tag? If you know of >>> a way to reproduce it, I would really love to hear it, because I cannot >>> reproduce the problem. If you remove the tag you seem to know a way to >>> reproduce it. >> If lots of people complain about the same problem, it is reproducible. > > Oh really? Even those, who observed the issue were *not* able to > reproduce it! Why do you change bug tags, when you even did not read the > whole report?!
I did read it. >> You seem to tag it unreproducible to not have to solve it > > WTF are you trying to say?! I spent several days trying to reproduce it! > I again repeat it: Even people who observed the issue were not able to > reproduce it! Downgrading and again upgrading worked perfectly! And > everything which is now attached to this report is: "Oh yes, I also had > this." Yeah, this is the information I need. Which proves that it does not work when downgrading first. > Two entities are not removed. But the maintainer scripts *remove* them. > So there must be a reason, why these two entities are not removed and I > cannot reproduce this behaviour. I think, that the Perl upgrade maybe > leave the system in a broken state, so the removal command fails. But I > cannot reproduce it and I tried several upgrade orders! Another > possibility is, that the package was shipped wih a CD and was broken on > this CD. But reporters told me, that the maintainer scripts on their > system were ok. However, re-installing the package also seems to solve > the problem. If downgrading does not reproduce it, it certainly looks like the removal command fails for some reason. > And now you better shut up and try to reproduce it yourself instead > trying to teach me about things, I already examined! I gave you a lot of > information, which all did not help me to reproduce it. If you think, I > try to *not* solve it: Well show me, how bad I maintain the package! Well, it's you who doesn't downgrade the severity even if you are sure most people are not affected and you're not able to reproduce the bug. >> or find a way >> to reproduce it which is not the use case of the tag AFAIK. > > I spent hours over hours and the tags meaning is: "This bug can't be > reproduced on the maintainer's system. Assistance from third parties is > needed in diagnosing the cause of the problem." This is exactly, what > I'm looking for! > > Find a way to reproduce it and then I will remove this tag. And now stop > your insulting behaviour! It was not meant as insulting at all, it just looked to me that you were giving the wrong message by not downgrading the bug. Btw, I downgraded the severity to important. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
