Your message dated Tue, 4 Jan 2022 20:09:45 +0100 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#1002906: reportbug should give a hint on how to check if a bug is still available in a newer release of a package has caused the Debian Bug report #1002906, regarding reportbug should give a hint on how to check if a bug is still available in a newer release of a package to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 1002906: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1002906 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: reportbug Version: 7.10.3+deb11u1 Severity: wishlist Dear Maintainer, * What led up to the situation? When I ran "reportbug ifupdown-extra" because of a wrong systemd service file it provides that I ran into after upgrading from debian 10 to debian 11, reportbug told me newer release(s) were already available in testing and unstable and I should verify whether or not the bug still exists there. However reportbug didn't tell me how to do this. * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? I searched for a while to find a way to access the source of ifupdown-extra. * What was the outcome of this action? I finally found the source of the package after a searching on packages.debian.org * What outcome did you expect instead? reportbug should point me to the correct place directly, like in this case for example to https://packages.debian.org/source/bookworm/ifupdown-extra for the new release in testing. A more novice user wouldn't have been able to verify if the bug he is about to report was already fixed because he would be lost how to find the source. -- Package-specific info: ** Environment settings: EDITOR="/usr/bin/vim" PAGER="less" INTERFACE="text" ** /home/thomas/.reportbugrc: reportbug_version "7.5.3~deb10u1" mode standard ui text email "[email protected]" -- System Information: Debian Release: 11.2 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable-security'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 5.10.0-10-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE not set Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled Versions of packages reportbug depends on: ii apt 2.2.4 ii python3 3.9.2-3 ii python3-reportbug 7.10.3+deb11u1 ii sensible-utils 0.0.14 reportbug recommends no packages. Versions of packages reportbug suggests: pn claws-mail <none> ii debconf-utils 1.5.77 ii debsums 3.0.2 ii dlocate 1.07+nmu1 pn emacs-bin-common <none> ii file 1:5.39-3 ii gnupg 2.2.27-2 ii postfix [mail-transport-agent] 3.5.6-1+b1 ii python3-urwid 2.1.2-1 pn reportbug-gtk <none> ii xdg-utils 1.1.3-4.1 Versions of packages python3-reportbug depends on: ii apt 2.2.4 ii file 1:5.39-3 ii python3 3.9.2-3 ii python3-apt 2.2.1 ii python3-debian 0.1.39 ii python3-debianbts 3.1.0 ii python3-requests 2.25.1+dfsg-2 ii sensible-utils 0.0.14 python3-reportbug suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On 31.12.2021 14.59, Thomas Köhler wrote: > reportbug told me newer release(s) were already available in > testing and unstable and I should verify whether or not the bug still > exists there. However reportbug didn't tell me how to do this. > reportbug should point me to the correct place directly, like in this > case for example to > https://packages.debian.org/source/bookworm/ifupdown-extra for the new > release in testing. > A more novice user wouldn't have been able to verify if the bug he is > about to report was already fixed because he would be lost how to find > the source. Thank you for the report. However, I don't think there is much we can do on the reportbug side, therefore I'm closing the bug. The trouble is that there is no single correct place to point to. There are too many ways how to do the verification, and finding the best way depends on a lot of knowledge about the package, the bug, and the user's specific situation and prior knowledge. Whatever reportbug would try to guess here would be wrong most of the time and likely to confuse the user even more. Perhaps a wiki page might be a better place to provide user guidance on this issue? There would be enough space there to cover a few different options.
--- End Message ---
