Comment 8 for bug 75381
Revision history for this message
| Peter Whittaker (pwwnow) wrote Three separate errors in this report? (Re: DBus errors on Command Line) | #8 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
There are several things going on in this bug report and I am tempted to file separate reports for some of them, so that we can track them properly. However, it would be best to have consensus as to the number of items and to separate reports....
Item 1: The dbus warning. From my understanding, this is because update-manager ends up being run as root, and the dbus process is being run as the user. More or less correct?
If running update-manager under sudo is going to cause problems, e.g., update-manager won't work properly, then there is definite bug - either update-manager should be fixed to refuse to work when real and effective UIDs are different, or update-manager should be fixed to work under this use case.
If the warning is harmless and everything will work, update-manager - or something - should be fixed so that the warning goes away. "Harmless warnings" are a great way to confuse less experienced or less OS savvy users (more on that below).
Item 2: The "introspect-error". I see this myself (when running "update-manager -c -d") and so far it seems harmless. However, it does say "error" and unexplained - yet harmless - errors are a great source of confusion and uncertainty for less computer savvy users.
This is especially true if we say that an officially supported upgrade path from Edgy to Feisty is to open a terminal and run "update-manager -c -d": If we say it is "the right to do" and it generates errors - no matter how harmless - our users will wonder whether we know what we are about.
The "the right to do" should generate errors ONLY if real errors occur!
Item 3: The crash. This seems the most serious issue. If it is an isolated case (a user reconfigured their system on their own and confused the application) then perhaps it isn't so serious after all. On the other hand, going forward we can expect naive system administration, and it would be good if the application was sufficiently robust to not dump core just 'cause it's confused.
My $0.02.
I volunteer to open the new reports, if we agree this is the correct course.