Re: bug-report about crashes with a back-trace

[Andrew Sobala <andrew sobala net>]

On Fri, 2002-11-01 at 23:01, Aschwin van der Woude wrote:
> Hi ppl,
> 
> What to do with bug-reports basically just containing back-traces and
> not having any duplicates, at least according to
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/simple-dup-finder.cgi?id=
> 
> For example:
> 
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97050http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97031
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96915
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96099
> 

All crashers should be severity "critical" (that's almost the definition
of "critical"), priority "high" and they can normally be confirmed too.

> Which priority should they have?
> I looked at closed bug-reports with dumps and 'critical' seems to be the
> norm for this type of bug-reports. Am I right?
> 
> What other tags should they get?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Aschwin
> 
> ps. the last example does show duplicates, but my guess is they are
> false positives
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-bugsquad mailing list
> Gnome-bugsquad gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-bugsquad
> 
-- 
Andrew

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GS/M d--(-) s: a17 C++(+++) UL+ P++ L+++ E--- W+>++ N(-) o? K? w--(---)
!O M V-
PS+ PE Y+ PGP+>++++ t@ 5-- X- R tv-@ b++++ DI+++ D>---- G- e- h! r--- y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------