Scott Robbins wrote:
Now, for me to report this bug, and for it to be worthwhile, I'd have to
install the alpha on a second machine and see if I can reproduce it.
This was an install off of the live CD. For me to feel justified
reporting it, I'd also want to install off the DVD and possibly a few
test installs of other live CDs, e.g., KDE and the like.
I think that repeatability with the original machine is useful. That
might involve uninstalling a package, removing config customizations,
and then reinstall, test, customize config, test. This helps to discern
whether it was a one-time issue, or related to the specific config
performed.
Before creating a bug entry, check that updating to current updates
hasn't already fixed the problem.
One way to do the A/B machine comparison is to run the test instance in
a virtual machine. {eg vmware-server - watch the installer
misconfiguring the selinux on /etc/services - and others}.
So, I don't report this bug, I don't want to waste the time of the
developers, especially when I see that no one else has mentioned it
More reason to actually create the bug. It is thoroughly impossible to
fix a bug that no one has reported ;-)
Even if it gets marked cant/wont fix - at least further people searching
for that issue can see the status, usually along with a description of
why it was marked that way - and hence not create another bug.
Nor do I post about it here, as this is a busy list, and again, I've
seen no one else mention it. (I'm simply posting about it now as an
example of a bug that I've experienced, and not reported.)
The Fedora people always say: stick it in bugzilla. Make sure you search
for it before adding a duplicate.
From the alpha/beta/rc changes, I get the impression that alpha is
'raw'er than test1 used to be.
DaveT.
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
