Bug 76392
| Summary: | imap's "popd" (and "pine") crashes when /etc/c-client.cf file configures a black-box-directory | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Linux | Reporter: | Need Real Name <chris> |
| Component: | imap | Assignee: | John Dennis <jdennis> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 7.3 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2004-02-27 10:39:59 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Need Real Name
2002-10-21 09:01:20 UTC
Correction: The crash occurrs if the user's directory DOES NOT exist. Have you reported this problem also to the upstream imap/pine/c-client development team? No I havent. Is this something *I* should do, or does RedHat liase with project teams directly? Depends on how fast you would like the problem investigated and/or fixed. Right now you've reached one developer whom is not part of the pine/imap development team, and is largely unfamiliar with the source code specifically. While I can attempt to reproduce the problem, and if it does occur, I can attempt to debug and/or fix it, it is a huge waste of my resources to troubleshoot every single bug that gets reported in bugzilla. I have to look at each bug reported and decide just how huge a problem the person is reporting and weigh it into the prioritization of other bugs that have been reported as I allocate my time to troubleshooting and debugging the plethora of open bug reports assigned to me. Every bug that gets reported to the official upstream maintainers of a given source code package by the bug reporter, maintains a two way communication between the person experiencing the problem, and the developer, or development team of numerous developers of whom are very familiar with the code they have written. In short, reporting the problem to the people who wrote the code, is the fastest possible way to get an answer to a suspected problem, be it a bug fix, workaround, patch, or indication that the problem isn't a bug, or possibly some other indication. Since you're the first to mention this problem, and since I consider that if it is in fact a legitimate bug, it likely only affects an extremely small portion of our userbase - possibly even just you. As such, I am very inclined to give it a very low priority compared to the other 300+ bugs I have assigned to me which affect a much much larger portion of users. Also, if you do report the problem upstream, and do get an answer back, and an upstream developer provides a patch or solution, it very well could get into the next official release or erratum, even if it isn't specifically considered a showstopper or high priority bug/problem. In some cases, a developer here at Red Hat will discuss a reported problem with upstream developers, and at other times, we will refer the bug reporter to do so themselves. So yes, I'd prefer it if you report this directly to the University of Washington yourself, and then provide an update here with the feedback they provide. That saves me a lot of time from playing middleman between the bug reporter and the upstream developers - or possibly chasing a red herring. Ok - I'll report to the authors, and get back to you with feedback. Thanks for taking the time to respond. |