Comments on: libc6: nightmare or just a bad dream?

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:13:06 +0000

@CLINT:

So you think alpha software is about running into breakage on purpose. Interesting. I think if bugs like this can be found by an automated system they shouldnt reach alpha testers. Most alpha testers want to help but it is not like most of them like having their system broken on purpose. You prolly do, but i dont.
I think running packages through a quick automated test before you send them to lots of people lets you concentrate on more important stuff cause you do not spend time on the easily fixable problems.

By: jim

jim — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 04:37:59 +0000

I don’t have a clue what happens with the devs when they release these things or what testing they do; however, if you are running hardy right now you ARE a tester too. Thanks for your help. Please report any bugs you encounter so they can be fixed.

By: Clint Brothers

Clint Brothers — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 03:59:34 +0000

@TOM: You are so wrong, That’s what you are supposed to expect in alpha software. Alpha is for testing so if things break they get tested by alpha testers (any one using the alpha version) if the test breaks something then it’s reported and fixed. This may have been a lame oversight for an alpha version but it’s not at release candidate stage for a reason.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:49:57 +0000

Oh sorry,

i meant the actual update developer at Canonical. He should have done the virtualbox thing. Packages for LTS ( even an alpha ) shouldnt have these obvious and devastating effects. I will add my idea to the lauchpad bug ..

By: nixternal

nixternal — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:27:21 +0000

@Tom: all of my software I do similar, however I don’t use virtualbox. I use my own production laptop. Then I do a test build and install on my amd64 box. I feel safer knowing that the package I have uploaded does the following:

1) Installs w/o any errors
2) Uninstalls w/o any errors
3) If system update, then reboot and login then test otherwise test and make sure it isn’t a regression from the previous release. That is why I tend to work on software/pakages that I use. That way there it is easier for me to notice regression.

A lot of the developers already do this as well. This one supposedly built and test fine locally, but once it hit the buildd’s, it produced a totally different outcome.

@Michael R. Head: You got it all fixed up already? Fairly easy to go through and fix. A wise man once said, never piss off your wife by installing software the could break things

By: Michael R. Head

Michael R. Head — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:41:06 +0000

Damn… thought I dodged a bullet on this problem yesterday. Turns out my wife ran the updates at just the wrong time and got bitten by it. It’s my fault really for moving her machine up to hardy before release…