[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080410.160555.89034540.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:05:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jesper.juhl@...il.com
Cc: tilman@...p.cc, lkml@....ca, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
jeff@...zik.org, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-net@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc8: FTP transfer errors
From: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 01:02:35 +0200
> On 11/04/2008, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > From: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
> > Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:09:11 +0200
> >
> > What people don't get is that this is a situation where the "end node
> > principle" applies. When you have limited resources (here:
> > developers) you don't push the bulk of the burdon upon them. Instead
> > you push things out to the resource you have a lot of, the end nodes
> > (here: users), so that the situation actually scales.
> >
> Again I can''t do anything but agree with you. You are right. When
> it's possible to do the work this way everyone wins.
> I was just trying to say that when it can't be done that way or the
> user won't, then the bug report still has value and still deserves to
> be taken seriously (although it probably goes lower in the pile than
> the bugs where the end users actually do bisect or whatever).
Absolutely. If, for example, someone has a clean OOPS I usually won't
request a bisect, that's stupid.
However if the OOPS is hard to diagnose, a bisect might be necessary
still.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists