Michael George <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 27 Dec 2006 20:57:43 -0500:
> You are right, I didn't search the gentoo bugs, but I shall in the > future. I didn't know that Google wouldn't grab them... It's not something one would expect, certainly, given that Google knows how to index and can often supply from cache as HTML everything from PDF to MS Word and Excel files. However, each bugzilla installation, certainly the big ones used by the various distributions and all the big projects, tends to be somewhat customized, so Google would need to customize it's bots for each one, and apparently the individual user segments interested in each one are small enough Google hasn't found it worth the trouble to do and maintain. So it's an understandable mis-assumption. Still, think about it. How many bugzilla results have you ever come across in your various Linux info searches? I've certainly not come across that many, if any. It's just that it doesn't occur to folks, since they are used to google indexing virtually /everything/ on the web. I knew I always used bugzilla for that type of searches, not google, but I didn't realize why, until someone happened to explain it in a post such as this one. So anyway, now you (and possibly others on the list) know. =8^) Google's good for a lot of stuff, but not for looking up bugs filed in bugzilla. Neat thing about newsgroups/mailing-lists that way. You ask a question, or read one someone else has asked, and often get answers to questions you didn't even know you had, in the process of getting the answer to the one. =8^) That's one reason I find them so much fun, as I never know what new and useful thing I'm going to learn when I load up the messages. =8^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- [email protected] mailing list
