Bugzilla (bugzilla.redhat.com) will be under maintenance for infrastructure upgrades and will not be unavailable on July 31st between 12:30 AM - 05:30 AM UTC. We appreciate your understanding and patience. You can follow status.redhat.com for details.
Bug 82738 - Step 2 (Search Bugzilla) returns non-relevant bugs
Summary: Step 2 (Search Bugzilla) returns non-relevant bugs
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Bugzilla
Classification: Community
Component: Bugzilla General
Version: 2.8
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Lawrence
QA Contact: David Lawrence
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2003-01-25 16:03 UTC by David White
Modified: 2007-04-18 16:50 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-01-27 07:01:14 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description David White 2003-01-25 16:03:17 UTC 
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20030115

Description of problem:
When following New Bug procedure, Step 2 (Search Bugzilla) returns non-relevant
bugs, making it useless.

I've given it a couple of keywords and retricted the search to the summary, but
I still wind up with what seems to be a dump of the entire bug database.  I.E.
NONE of the summaries have any of my requested keywords.  It's almost like it's
matching on the whitespace between the tokens.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Type keywords into Search widget at Step 2
2. Hit Search
3. Wait a **very** long time for search
4. Scroll through **very** long list without seeing requested keywords
    

Actual Results:  Per above

Expected Results:  A list of just the requested keywords

Additional info: Maybe if it worked, I'd use the feature...
Comment 1 David Lawrence 2003-01-27 07:01:14 UTC 
This should now be fixed. Please reopen bug report if not that case. Thanks!
Comment 2 David White 2003-01-28 03:05:36 UTC 
Much better!  Thanks!
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.