Quoting Santiago Vila ([email protected]): > On Fri, 24 Oct 2014, Ivo De Decker wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:09:17AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > I upgraded to the samba packages in unstable (4.1.13) and > > > unfortunately the panic messages still happen. > > > > > > Could you please forward this upstream? (This bug still appears as > > > "Unclassified" in BTS web pages) > > > > It's probably best if you submit a bug yourself in the upstream bug tracker: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/ > > I ended up doing that, yes: > > https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10907 > > But frankly, I expected the Debian samba maintainers to do that (as I > try to do for the bugs I receive). It's probably best if people would > not have to report things twice.
THanks for reporting, Santiago. When it comes at samba, the value added by maintainers acting as proxies between bug submitters and upstream is sometimes near to zero. Even more, we often don't have easy ways to reproduce the users' testing environment, particularly in the case of such panics. Even more, in many cases, upstream ends up requesting more information or test cases and we end up acting as proxies the other way, too. So, in some situations, requesting bug submitters to report the bugs themselves is done after careful thinking and balancing the advantages vs the caveats of that choice, believe us.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
