Re: This needs attention
Nicholas and list, On May 27, 2014 6:09 PM, "Nicholas Skaggs" wrote: > > On 05/27/2014 03:51 PM, C de-Avillez wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella >> wrote: >>> >>> On 27/05/14 16:56, C de-Avillez wrote: A technical opinion on a technical issue will rule out every other opinion until proved wrong. >>> >>> >>> Summarizing: for confirming this bug, you need to provide a series of steps >>> that will break GRUB consistently. >>> >>> Till then the appropriate status for the report is "opinion". >>> >> Actually, even then I would rather have a new bug opened. This one is >> done and gone :-) >> > Well, I've been under the weather and traveling and didn't see this post until now. Many thanks to those level-headed folks who stepped into the discussion here. > > As to the bug, if it is affecting you, the best thing you can do is to recreate the problem. After the problem has happened again, use ubuntu-bug to file a new bug and describe how you arrived at the problem. Try and simplify creating the problem to isolate what is triggering it. This is all work you as an end-user can do that greatly helps a developer actually solve the bug. The next time a bug of yours is marked as invalid or opinion, take that as an oppurtunity to file a more complete bug report that will allow someone to properly confirm it; learn from it. Instead of attacking a developer, ask someone to help you understand what data is missing / needed and how you can obtain it. Stay constructive! Not to gainsay Nicholas or anyone else but one important thing to keep in mind here is that this problem / configuration error / whatever BORKS the machine, if I am reading correctly. Ie no friendly Ubuntu environment to run ubuntu-bug or any of those other great diagnostic tools. So in this kind of situation when someone is panicking because their newly upgraded computer now fails to boot, it seems to me worthwhile to have some kind of help to get them through the rough patch. Just my 2¢ worth. > > Finally, it's important to heed the advice of those who can help you. As Scott side, software can be furstrating, and working within a community can be too. Let's keep the CoC in mind; we are all here because we care about making ubuntu better. > +1 to that. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: This needs attention
On 05/27/2014 03:51 PM, C de-Avillez wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: On 27/05/14 16:56, C de-Avillez wrote: A technical opinion on a technical issue will rule out every other opinion until proved wrong. Summarizing: for confirming this bug, you need to provide a series of steps that will break GRUB consistently. Till then the appropriate status for the report is "opinion". Actually, even then I would rather have a new bug opened. This one is done and gone :-) Well, I've been under the weather and traveling and didn't see this post until now. Many thanks to those level-headed folks who stepped into the discussion here. As to the bug, if it is affecting you, the best thing you can do is to recreate the problem. After the problem has happened again, use ubuntu-bug to file a new bug and describe how you arrived at the problem. Try and simplify creating the problem to isolate what is triggering it. This is all work you as an end-user can do that greatly helps a developer actually solve the bug. The next time a bug of yours is marked as invalid or opinion, take that as an oppurtunity to file a more complete bug report that will allow someone to properly confirm it; learn from it. Instead of attacking a developer, ask someone to help you understand what data is missing / needed and how you can obtain it. Stay constructive! Finally, it's important to heed the advice of those who can help you. As Scott side, software can be furstrating, and working within a community can be too. Let's keep the CoC in mind; we are all here because we care about making ubuntu better. Nicholas -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: This needs attention
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > On 27/05/14 16:56, C de-Avillez wrote: >> >> A technical opinion on a technical issue will rule out every other >> opinion until proved wrong. > > > Summarizing: for confirming this bug, you need to provide a series of steps > that will break GRUB consistently. > > Till then the appropriate status for the report is "opinion". > Actually, even then I would rather have a new bug opened. This one is done and gone :-) -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: This needs attention
On 27/05/14 16:56, C de-Avillez wrote: A technical opinion on a technical issue will rule out every other opinion until proved wrong. Summarizing: for confirming this bug, you need to provide a series of steps that will break GRUB consistently. Till then the appropriate status for the report is "opinion". Regards. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: FW: Bug with grub
El 27/05/14 18:43, Ralph Figueroa escribió: RedWar here. My solution to Grub has been to rewrite it and revert to GRUB 2. This video has been helpful to me. I hope that it is helpful to all of you. http://youtu.be/ajs9rO5upZA Please, include it in the bug report description as a work-around: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1289977 Thanks. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
FW: Bug with grub
Guys, According to Phillip this is a result of people installing grub improperly. Please see the attached email. -Original Message- From: "Phillip Susi" Sent: 5/26/2014 9:25 PM To: "Jack Ramsay" Subject: Re: Bug with grub -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/26/2014 08:22 PM, Jack Ramsay wrote: | Sir, | Why do you keep marking this bug as do not fix? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1289977 | It seems to be a very critical bug and on our quality side of things it is causing trouble. Because as I have said in the bug report dozens of times, it is the result of user error: they either directly, or by using this third party boot-repair disc, have installed grub in a broken and unsupported way. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTg/eSAAoJEI5FoCIzSKrwO6UH/0NWQRMZJIos+L/8hQyK+2m9 3vIlCfthQoGfox0PHzHsTFuVHMI6Yv6tQFJXY6t5ZqYjW3lCe1r+xgbnFptR5mBH sy/UeyBKwJvLRXP7CkuGljCITSR8MQgzyWEXYMxo3UdBNZxMYB5jYQxJXIyso3Rp 4kpoWz5OQJ0E/fgpucLjMk0GacdO/Iz5nV+YxqAjgIV8IQItdcDfYw1aM+yUBJ4P rS/e9uuEGBNs7E7pCDx6EeARGKzDBXxnaOUxMVpqnd5liDWJl5bV9CDxnzLjbiO9 AMRnWVJDi87aoJStTqd4uCwMnh461dFwNtmN3LstDLm6Zt0GK/jlinucKU7DSto= =ZmOf -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: FW: Bug with grub
RedWar here. My solution to Grub has been to rewrite it and revert to GRUB 2. This video has been helpful to me. I hope that it is helpful to all of you. http://youtu.be/ajs9rO5upZA On May 27, 2014 12:40 PM, "Jack Ramsay" wrote: > Guys, > According to Phillip this is a result of people installing grub > improperly. Please see the attached email. > > -Original Message- > From: "Phillip Susi" > Sent: 5/26/2014 9:25 PM > To: "Jack Ramsay" > Subject: Re: Bug with grub > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 05/26/2014 08:22 PM, Jack Ramsay wrote: > | Sir, > | Why do you keep marking this bug as do not fix? > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1289977 > | It seems to be a very critical bug and on our quality side of things it > is causing trouble. > > Because as I have said in the bug report dozens of times, it is the result > of user error: they either directly, or by using this third party > boot-repair disc, have installed grub in a broken and unsupported way. > > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1 > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTg/eSAAoJEI5FoCIzSKrwO6UH/0NWQRMZJIos+L/8hQyK+2m9 > 3vIlCfthQoGfox0PHzHsTFuVHMI6Yv6tQFJXY6t5ZqYjW3lCe1r+xgbnFptR5mBH > sy/UeyBKwJvLRXP7CkuGljCITSR8MQgzyWEXYMxo3UdBNZxMYB5jYQxJXIyso3Rp > 4kpoWz5OQJ0E/fgpucLjMk0GacdO/Iz5nV+YxqAjgIV8IQItdcDfYw1aM+yUBJ4P > rS/e9uuEGBNs7E7pCDx6EeARGKzDBXxnaOUxMVpqnd5liDWJl5bV9CDxnzLjbiO9 > AMRnWVJDi87aoJStTqd4uCwMnh461dFwNtmN3LstDLm6Zt0GK/jlinucKU7DSto= > =ZmOf > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: This needs attention
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > El 27/05/14 00:19, Matteo Sisti Sette escribió: > >> If you care about ubuntu "quality" you need to have a look at this: >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/__ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/__1289977 > > > Brian; as Ubuntu Bug Master; could you please give your opinion in this > report, so everybody can stop this long argument? Answered on my reply to Gabor. Summary: * the original issue was shown to have been caused by reconfiguring only one of multiple Grub installs; * users kept on forcing the issue, although requested again and again to open new bugs. * what could be done is edit the bug's description and add a summary. -- ..hggdh.. -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
Re: This needs attention
(I am using Gabor's email to answer a series of points in many emails. I am just using his email because it is much clearer, complete, and nice than some of the previous emails.) On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Gabor Toth wrote: > Hi, > > I feel like I need to say something to this conversation as I found this > subject quite disturbing. As part of my work I install Ubuntu systems to > customers and use Ubuntu for long years now, having been through almost all > distros of Ubuntu. I have done some testing too and helped on bug squad > some. These days did not have that much time to contribute, but I do my > best as you guys. I also find the OP's comments quite disturbing. I am also curious: have you had this issue yourself? I hear around that this is a critical bug, that the skies will fall if it is not fixed, that everybody is affected by it, etc. But I personally do not know anyone that has been affected, and I have not had this issue myself, on all of my 26 upgrades to Trusty. And yes, I do have some systems with more than one drive; but none with other OSes installed. > > While the discussion on this forum seems to be a lot of back and forth this > is nothing to what is going on on the actual bug report and forum there. > Reading it through I do not have a doubt in my mind that this IS an actual > bug even though I am not effected by it. I beg to differ. If -- and this is based *only* on the original issue in the bug -- the user had two different installs of Grub on two different disk drives, and (for whatever reason, however it may have happened) the Grub configuration got mixed/lost/confused, *then* this (original) error will pop up. > If one does a dist upgrade and > his system was working before and after the upgrade going through without > any warning it lives him with an unusable (even though fixable) system it > is something you would not expect dist upgrade to do - thus it is a bug, > per definition of a bug. No. Code changes. If (and, again, discussing the *original* issue in the bug) you had multiple installs of one thing, and the system does *not* know bout these multiple installs, then it is not a bug. If is an user error. In this case, it was caused by a stale copy of Grub being run. If what I just said does not apply, then it is a *different* bug. >A part of a system does something that you do not > expect it to do and of course it is quite high priority since en entire > system becomes broken and it apparently effects multiple users. > > There is something else quite disturbing though. There seem to be one > person in the programmer side of the team that keeps disagreeing with the > everyone else and is able to push her own opinion (which seems very wrong > by the way) in front of the entire community. Perhaps because he knows what he was asking for and doing, as opposed from almost every other commenter in the bug. Please keep in mind that a bug is a *technical* report about an error/failure. It will be looked at by *technical* people. As such, It HAS to have technical data. > When you look at the bug > report the status is being set back and forth and that one person > apparently just "cancelling" this bug while it is reported by a number of > others. And stating why. And being disregarded. I personally would have put the bug as OPINION a long time ago. The *only* thing that may still be done is explain, in the bug description, WHY, and WHAT can be done. Let me try to clear some (possible) misconceptions about bugs, and how we deal with them (both for triaging, and for fixing). The first two are *dogmas*. We will not change them. * one issue per (bug) report * one (bug) report per issue This means a Launchpad bug should describe one, and only one, issue. If multiple issues are shown in one single bug report, then they HAVE to be broken down to different Launchpad bugs. This is not required because we are mean (developers|triagers), but because we need to be able to backtrack a fix to a bug (and vice-versa). If the fix introduces a (new) failure, then we need to be able to pinpoint it to the correct bug report. This would not happen if we have multiple issues per bug. In this specific bug, we have at least two different issues being conflated; we also have the original reporter's issue being shown as a failure (user's, or perhaps grub's); a way to fix it was provided early on (and it should be clear that the issue came about mostly because, at some point in time, the user used the wrong command sequence to update Grub). As such, the original report *has* to be closed. Many times throughout the hundreds of comments Phillip stated that. I will also note that I personally will tend to trust Phillip: he usually knows what he is talking about and, certainly, he knows more than I do on Grub. * When you open a bug, please add the (minimum) required data. Ideally, *NEVER* open a bug by hand (almost all of the opened-by-hand bugs miss the minimum required data). Phill
Re: This needs attention
Hi Gabor and Phill, I add another +1 for putting into words some of the frustration I have seen whereby one person continually cancels out what is a clear issue for many others. Best regards Nio 2014-05-27 09:03, Phill Whiteside skrev: > Hi Gabor, > > I have kept silent on this issue, but I give you a huge +1 for putting into > words some of the frustration I have seen whereby one person continually > cancels out what is a clear issue for many others. > > Regards, > > Phill. > > > On 27 May 2014 07:35, Gabor Toth wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I feel like I need to say something to this conversation as I found this >> subject quite disturbing. As part of my work I install Ubuntu systems to >> customers and use Ubuntu for long years now, having been through almost all >> distros of Ubuntu. I have done some testing too and helped on bug squad >> some. These days did not have that much time to contribute, but I do my >> best as you guys. >> >> While the discussion on this forum seems to be a lot of back and forth this >> is nothing to what is going on on the actual bug report and forum there. >> Reading it through I do not have a doubt in my mind that this IS an actual >> bug even though I am not effected by it. If one does a dist upgrade and >> his system was working before and after the upgrade going through without >> any warning it lives him with an unusable (even though fixable) system it >> is something you would not expect dist upgrade to do - thus it is a bug, >> per definition of a bug. A part of a system does something that you do not >> expect it to do and of course it is quite high priority since en entire >> system becomes broken and it apparently effects multiple users. >> >> There is something else quite disturbing though. There seem to be one >> person in the programmer side of the team that keeps disagreeing with the >> everyone else and is able to push her own opinion (which seems very wrong >> by the way) in front of the entire community. When you look at the bug >> report the status is being set back and forth and that one person >> apparently just "cancelling" this bug while it is reported by a number of >> others. >> >> This very point is the main concern on this whole thing. If Ubuntu is a >> community, which it should be, then this should not ever happen. One >> person's opinion should not over rule everyone else's opinion. I am not >> sure who she is, but this whole process was not something that you could >> call an executive decision. Perhaps she had no capacity, knowledge, or >> interest to fix this bug and thus wanted to put it under the carpet for >> whatever reason. And the reason does not even matter here! It is a >> community and this would be a point when others could step in an offer >> their expertise and time and do fix the bug. However with her actions she >> did not only stepped down, but also stopped others to work on it since she >> simple "cancelled" this bug out entirely. And this is not some little >> design point or some minor program we are talking about but either grub or >> the dist upgrade process that has a functionality which should not be that >> way to be able called "workable". >> >> Per what I see something is working if it requires no attention in the >> future and it just does what it should. This is per definition "working". >> Anything else is a bug. >> >> Now, if I install an Ubuntu system, say on a customers computer, and make >> that system a workable system (which sometimes might require some custom >> tuning due to no out of box support for some sort of hardware) then I would >> think that this is a workable system and the user, with no knowledge of >> command prompt, not knowing what grub was and if thinking that dpkg was >> some special ice cream should not be able to break a fully workable system >> just by clicking on a button of dist upgrade and entering her own password. >> And again, in some of the mentioned cases there was not even any manual >> config and handling of the system but was a clear automated install broken >> by a simple upgrade. >> >> I personally think that we as a community need to look at this issue and I >> am not talking about the bug itself (which needs to be fixed too) but the >> issue of one person's opinion could cancel out (and thus enrage) other >> people of the community with living an issue hanging in the air with no >> apparent way of solving the different opinions in any way shape or form. >> It should not be that who has a higher authority that is right no matter >> how wrong she is. >> >> Is there anyone at canonical that can take a look at this? Seems a >> correction of this particular programmer needed on dealing with community >> raised bugs specially because she won't be able to work like this with the >> rest of the guys if she does not let them propose solutions and fixes but >> trying to silence them. >> >> With Kind Regards, >> >> Gabor Toth >> >> Phone: +45-2163-4983 >> Skype: g
Re: This needs attention
Hi Gabor, I have kept silent on this issue, but I give you a huge +1 for putting into words some of the frustration I have seen whereby one person continually cancels out what is a clear issue for many others. Regards, Phill. On 27 May 2014 07:35, Gabor Toth wrote: > Hi, > > I feel like I need to say something to this conversation as I found this > subject quite disturbing. As part of my work I install Ubuntu systems to > customers and use Ubuntu for long years now, having been through almost all > distros of Ubuntu. I have done some testing too and helped on bug squad > some. These days did not have that much time to contribute, but I do my > best as you guys. > > While the discussion on this forum seems to be a lot of back and forth this > is nothing to what is going on on the actual bug report and forum there. > Reading it through I do not have a doubt in my mind that this IS an actual > bug even though I am not effected by it. If one does a dist upgrade and > his system was working before and after the upgrade going through without > any warning it lives him with an unusable (even though fixable) system it > is something you would not expect dist upgrade to do - thus it is a bug, > per definition of a bug. A part of a system does something that you do not > expect it to do and of course it is quite high priority since en entire > system becomes broken and it apparently effects multiple users. > > There is something else quite disturbing though. There seem to be one > person in the programmer side of the team that keeps disagreeing with the > everyone else and is able to push her own opinion (which seems very wrong > by the way) in front of the entire community. When you look at the bug > report the status is being set back and forth and that one person > apparently just "cancelling" this bug while it is reported by a number of > others. > > This very point is the main concern on this whole thing. If Ubuntu is a > community, which it should be, then this should not ever happen. One > person's opinion should not over rule everyone else's opinion. I am not > sure who she is, but this whole process was not something that you could > call an executive decision. Perhaps she had no capacity, knowledge, or > interest to fix this bug and thus wanted to put it under the carpet for > whatever reason. And the reason does not even matter here! It is a > community and this would be a point when others could step in an offer > their expertise and time and do fix the bug. However with her actions she > did not only stepped down, but also stopped others to work on it since she > simple "cancelled" this bug out entirely. And this is not some little > design point or some minor program we are talking about but either grub or > the dist upgrade process that has a functionality which should not be that > way to be able called "workable". > > Per what I see something is working if it requires no attention in the > future and it just does what it should. This is per definition "working". > Anything else is a bug. > > Now, if I install an Ubuntu system, say on a customers computer, and make > that system a workable system (which sometimes might require some custom > tuning due to no out of box support for some sort of hardware) then I would > think that this is a workable system and the user, with no knowledge of > command prompt, not knowing what grub was and if thinking that dpkg was > some special ice cream should not be able to break a fully workable system > just by clicking on a button of dist upgrade and entering her own password. > And again, in some of the mentioned cases there was not even any manual > config and handling of the system but was a clear automated install broken > by a simple upgrade. > > I personally think that we as a community need to look at this issue and I > am not talking about the bug itself (which needs to be fixed too) but the > issue of one person's opinion could cancel out (and thus enrage) other > people of the community with living an issue hanging in the air with no > apparent way of solving the different opinions in any way shape or form. > It should not be that who has a higher authority that is right no matter > how wrong she is. > > Is there anyone at canonical that can take a look at this? Seems a > correction of this particular programmer needed on dealing with community > raised bugs specially because she won't be able to work like this with the > rest of the guys if she does not let them propose solutions and fixes but > trying to silence them. > > With Kind Regards, > > Gabor Toth > > Phone: +45-2163-4983 > Skype: gabor.me > > Copenhagen, Denmark > > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Scott Kitterman >wrote: > > > > > -- > > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > > Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > > > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubun
