This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Update on bugzilla stuff
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Cc: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>, neil at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 11:30:56 -0800
- Subject: Re: Update on bugzilla stuff
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201010207510.3840-100000@dberlin.org> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201011852500.11139-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 07:00:22PM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2002, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
> > I removed the platform and os fields, fixed some other bugs/missing things
> > in conversion i noticed/you guys pointed out, and added the
> > host/build/target fields and extraction of them from the prs.
> > It also puts the environment field contents into a comment.
> > I had this done a week ago, but was out of town, and it's all on a new
> > machine (installed today), so i didn't get a chance to put it up till now.
It might also make sense to drop Product, unless we can make
meaningful use of it. (Possibly things like libstdc++, web, etc,
could usefully be Products instead of Components.)
> The search form still looks a mess in Lynx, with multiple fields (Product,
> Component, Version) having their values in a single vertical list with all
> the headings above that list.
This is probably hopeless - it's because Lynx doesn't do tables.
Links renders it better.
> Some bug reports (e.g. 545) still get links such as "mailto:neil" without
> an @gcc.gnu.org. Also, that bug report has Reporter listed as
> gnats@gcc.gnu.org, which is wrong.
In a search-results page, the "Owner" column probably shouldn't list
the @gcc.gnu.org, it makes the column way too wide.
> > There is one bug report that was too large to insert into the
> > database without fiddling mysql parameters, which is 5154.
> > This happens because the file is not a real attachment, so it wants to
> > insert it as a comment. The query times out inserting 21 meg of
> > text. This is not a server or client bug, it just takes that long to
> > un-sql quote it,parse it, etc.
> > Right now I handle this bug report manually (the perl script doing
> > the conversion specifically skips it), since 8 bazillion pages of comment
> > text would be useless anyway.
>
> Making the comment text into an attachment manually in the conversion
> script for this PR is probably the appropriate solution.
Or we could edit that PR by hand and turn the text into an attachment.
Right now, both mozilla and links choke trying to render the gnatsweb
page.
zw