Hello, I think you still do not understand what the user who reports bug against your packages receives. Here is an example, this is the only mail which I get when you close a bug.
READ IT: * Debian Bug Tracking System [Sat, Jan 23 2010, 11:36:09PM]: > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report > which was filed against the initramfs-tools package: > > #566480: wait loop spams the console > > It has been closed by maximilian attems <m...@stro.at>. > > Their explanation is attached below along with your original report. > If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a > better one in a separate message then please contact maximilian attems > <m...@stro.at> by > replying to this email. > -- > 566480: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=566480 See? Where is the information that it talks about? It was not sent by you in email. Let's click on the page. There is still nothing at the first glance. NOTHING. Your only small comment line is hidden in some linked BTS control mail. > Debian Bug Tracking System > Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 07:46:05PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > reopen 566480 > > thanks > > stop it, with this attitude you won't get much an explanation. Does any "right" attitude exist that will cause getting more information from you? I don't think so. > beside the obvious that a short loop is desirable for quicker > boot and thus not a boot. Parse error. It might be desirable but it, as said, spams the console. > for more hints on debugging read man initramfs-tools. RLLY? Let's check: | debug generates lots of output. It writes a log to /dev/.initramfs/initramfs.debug. Instead when invoked with an arbitrary argument output is written to console. Use for example "debug=vc". Obvious questions: what is in the output? Does it expect an argument/value or not? What does "Instead of" refer to, instead of ... what? What does "vc" mean in the example? Do you want me to review and improve that manpage? (= serious offer to help) > closing with maintainers hat on, loose someone else time. The maintainer's hat is not a license for any kind of rude behavior. > > Weil das mehr Arbeit für mich verursacht? Weil DU also extra Arbeit den > > Anderen auflastet, um dir ein Minimum davon zu ersparen? > > yes this called free software, read the source and fix it. ... and also not a license to bring standard excuses. > I don't use kernel-package nor does linux-2.6 use it, nor would i ever > recommend it to my worst enemy. but it was fucking me who tried to come > up with a fucking patch. First, I don't care much about what exactly happens behind the scenes and who created which patch for whom and why and when and for what... I just report an obvious bug in a package to its maintainer (or call it "unexpected bad behavior" if you are allergic to the word "bug"). That's all. Since I am just a user here, I do not have to make myself prepared to dispatch your internal issues. YOU have the maintainers hat on, so take the responsibility which this brings along. Second, get some vacation, ASAP, please. You are demonstrating burnout symptoms (profanity, overreacting) similar to those seen on Xu (former initrdtools maintainer) short time before he left. That's not good, not for you, not for others. Regards, Eduard. -- <LGS> Halloechen, ihr Spinner, so frueh auf? <nusse> nein, wir schlafen alle im kollektiv <knorke> mein alkoven ist kaputt <teq> alkohol kaputt? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org