On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 05:08:36PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Apport has actually done that for a long time, and mark these crash
> reports with "UnreportableReason". Almost all of the unreportable ones
> get uploaded to errors anyway (I'm not particularly happy about that,
> but that's the status quo), but we specifically blacklist the ones for
> this case (i. e. "binary upgraded underneath you"). Is that broken?
> I. e. do you have an example where this actually did get sent to
> errors.u.c.? We should fix that ASAP then.
No, I dont have any firm proof of that. I sometimes saw "the" resolved
stacktraces where the linenumbers were off for the version of the source I was
looking at -- but then again this has to be expected when there are different
versions affected by the same crash (Im blissfully ignorant about how apport
matches those as "the same" though anyway).
FWIW, I rarely look at errors.ubuntu.com for well reproducable bugs -- those
are better judged by looking at the reproduction scenario anyway. So the ones
Im interested in on Errors are always the somewhat tricky ones and hardly those
that are a good base for checking if errors.ubuntu.com does the right thing.
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel