| 2007-04-14 10:12:55 |
Ralph Corderoy |
hwdb-client: statusexplanation |
It works now. |
This bug isn't fixed. It would have been but too many other bugs have
wrongly been made a duplicate of it when they have a separate fault that
needs fixing. We're now in the confusing situation where sebas
reasonably thinks the bug is fixed because the fault he reported has
gone, whereas I know this separate other bug, that needs a different
fix, is still present.
I've analysed this bug and the others that have been marked as
duplicates.
#18125 sebas doesn't have /sbin in PATH so route(8) not found.
#20269 Matt MacLeod doesn't have /sbin in PATH so route(8) not found.
#18283 Ralph Corderoy diagnoses empty `route -n' output cause.
#33492 DaneM diagnoses empty `route -n' output cause.
#48535 bailey diagnoses empty `route -n' output cause.
#85322 Stephen Drake suffers from empty `route -n' output.
#85866 jmdennis diagnoses empty `route -n' output cause.
#92174 neuromancer suffers from empty `route -n' output.
I think bug #20269 is the only duplicate of this bug since that too is
to do with route(8) being in /sbin.
The other six bugs are all duplicates of my bug #18283 and should be
altered to reflect this. They are all caused by `route -n' not
outputing a gateway 0.0.0.0 route, as it is allowed to do.
To leave the last six bugs above as duplicates of this bug is wrong,
misleading, has no obvious benefit, and stops them having separate
priorities. This bug is an issue with who is responsible with route(8)
being found, hwdb-gui or PATH, the other is an application issue of what
to do if there's no default route.
Can someone with the appropriate powers please alter bug #18283 to not
be a duplicate of this bug, and then alter bug #33492, bug #48535,
bug #85322, bug #85866, and bug #92174 to be duplicates of bug #18283.
Thanks, Ralph. |
|
