>From: Eugene V. Lyubimkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Elliott Mitchell wrote: > > Have you looked at how many reports there are of the MMap problem and how > > old they are? > > > > A quick browse found #178623, #295051 and #380509. Plus #400768 which is > > a distinct problem, but still tickles the MMap problem. > > > > #178623 is *five* *years* *old*! And *nothing* has been done to fix it, > > all that has occured is increasing the limit, which works around the > > problem for a litle while. > > > > An average of 5-10 bug reports per year for five *years* isn't enough to > > consider this a grave problem?! 5 years ago, I think important would have > > been appropriate, work needs to start *now* on a *fix*.
> Hm, I don't see how the age of bug is related to its severity. Perhaps, but given that there are likely 25-50 reports of the MMap issue (without the core dump); then perhaps double or triple that for people who used Google, found it was already reported and the workaround; then all the "me too" reports on various ones of those bug. Plus I can look for all the reports where the MMap issue isn't the core problem, but it pops up and complicates the issue. Suddenly the MMap bug, which this is part of this report accounts for 50% of all normal or higher bug reports against APT. I think that qualifies as a severe bug that should have had work started on an actual fix rather than another workaround when it was reported on the second consecutive distribution release. -- (\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/) \BS ( | [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP F6B23DE0 | ) / \_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/ 2477\___\_|_/DC21 03A0 5D61 985B <-PGP-> F2BE 6526 ABD2 F6B2\_|_/___/3DE0 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
