© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
Hi Steve, thanks very much for responding.
Your questions demonstrate that I do not yet know how apport and LP match duplicates, and more, and I may be using some terms poorly.
> But how exactly did apport send you there?
Apport popped up its window and asked me to file. I clicked 'Continue' on the local apport client, and it told me the bug was already reported, and opened bug 628104. I think the client-side duplicate checking matched it.
> There is no bug pattern in place for bug #628104 and never has been.
I see I don't know the bug system well enough. It looks like it's matching the traceback, with the several lines of python error output, ending in "AptDaemonError: org.debian.apt: Could not cancel transaction". I don't yet know the difference between that and a proper bug pattern, then.
> Nor did you file a new bug report and have it marked as a duplicate by the retracer.
I did not, since I saw other users had done so, and the retracer had duped them back to 628104. I intended to file that bug, then I realized it had been done, as in comments 7 and 8, there:
"When the crach occured the system claimed it was already reported and opened this bug.
I now manually uploaded it as Bug #915413"
------
"I had this crash occur in precise as well. Note that #915413 was marked as a duplicate of this bug."
I tried to follow what the system wanted, and uploaded my crash file there. (https:/
Eventually, it seemed I had to try filing this bug, purposefully without the traceback, to make an open bug report.
> Did apport really send you there at all, or did you simply follow a link to that bug in your browser when offered as a "possibly similar" existing bug?
Yes, apport sent me there directly, same as the user I quote above. I've seen the "possibly similar" screen, but apport did not have these questions in this case. The recent comments on 628104 look like they're generally coming straight via apport.
> The only new bug report filed against update-manager or aptdaemon showing this crash is bug #976889, which was filed a week ago.
Ah, I can't see that one; don't know if it's private, or what.
Rather than new reports, there are a number of users filing new comments on 628104, because apport and/or LP send them there. That's what I'm being dogged about here -- it appears users now can't file a new bug, if they follow apport. Nor open the old one So I've been trying to get human attention, in case it's needed.
It has appeared, and it's only my best effort to understand, that new reports are falling into a little hole in the system. I'm rather sorry if I seem to come off as a crank. I've seen the new reports slowly accumulating on that bug, and wondered if it was my little user duty to do more. Thanks.