El lun, 16-04-2012 a las 10:40 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
> El lun, 16-04-2012 a las 03:04 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió:
> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:55:04 +0200
> > Pacho Ramos <pa...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Well, I currently manually do eix searching to check it, maybe would
> > > be a way to compare eix outputs with "${CATEGORY}/${PKGNAME}" from bug
> > > summaries (bugs without that naming structure would be uncovered by
> > > this, but we would still be able to easily check for obsolete bug
> > > reports).
> >
> > I only started fixing summaries to include valid, canonical
> > cat/pkg[-ver] strings a few years ago because searching for a full
> > atom in bugzilla's search would otherwise (and still does) fail.
> >
> > Before that it was mayhem, and it's mainly the older bugs you appear be
> > worried about. Having a list of bugs to fix the cat/pkg for would have
> > more uses than the one you're interested in.
> >
> >
> > jer
> >
> >
>
> I obviously agree, but both suggestions are not mutually exclusive I
> think :)This is another example I hit today: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247750 that would benefit from this QA report
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
