From owner-freebsd-bugbusters@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 26 16:20:26 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BD9106564A for ; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:20:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kai@xs4all.net) Received: from smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 561348FC2B for ; Mon, 26 May 2008 16:20:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kai@xs4all.net) Received: from zarniwoob.xs4all.nl (zarniwoob.xs4all.nl [194.109.0.125]) by smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4QG2e2F041264 for ; Mon, 26 May 2008 18:03:13 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kai@xs4all.net) Message-Id: From: Kai Storbeck To: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org X-Ncc-Regid: nl.xs4all Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 18:03:12 +0200 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Subject: Amd X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Coordination of the Problem Report handling effort." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 16:20:26 -0000 Hello all, I've just subscribed, trying to be useful. Theres a few things I've noticed on the new problem reports; The valid tag "amd" doesn't refer to a scsi driver but to the automount daemon [amd(8)]. On the NFS tag I found 2 problem tickets both referring to NFS stalling on NIS lookups albeit on different stages in the loading: conf/17540 and conf/22308. They are both quite old, and if I would be in the position of fixing bugs, I'd ask them to resubmit it. Its 2008. Is there a policy on old tickets on old issues that really should have a followup for a later release? Kai -- This was an above the .signature production From owner-freebsd-bugbusters@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 27 02:55:25 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 130E1106564A for ; Tue, 27 May 2008 02:55:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (lefty.soaustin.net [66.135.55.46]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79E18FC19 for ; Tue, 27 May 2008 02:55:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id DB6588C09F; Mon, 26 May 2008 21:37:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 21:37:03 -0500 To: Kai Storbeck Message-ID: <20080527023703.GE31491@soaustin.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) Cc: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Amd X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Coordination of the Problem Report handling effort." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 02:55:25 -0000 On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 06:03:12PM +0200, Kai Storbeck wrote: > The valid tag "amd" doesn't refer to a scsi driver but to the > automount daemon [amd(8)]. OK, fixed. > On the NFS tag I found 2 problem tickets both referring to NFS > stalling on NIS lookups albeit on different stages in the loading: > conf/17540 and conf/22308. They are both quite old, and if I would be > in the position of fixing bugs, I'd ask them to resubmit it. Its 2008. > > Is there a policy on old tickets on old issues that really should have > a followup for a later release? Not a "policy" as such, more a set of guidelines. What we have found is that many bugs tend to persist :-( thus, closing them merely because they are old does not necessarily help anything. What we normally do is to set them to 'feedback' and in that process send mail to the submitter asking if it is still a problem. About half the time the email bounces, about 25% of the time the problem still exists, and then there are variations. If you'd like to chip in, feel free to send a followup to each of them, and then remind me, so I can set the state to 'feedback'. Thanks. mcl