Re: Bug reporting [Was: Re: [PATCH] change gnats.html to fix web/8168]

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>]

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Joseph S. Myers wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
> 
> > One of the unfortunate consequences would be that people start sending the 
> > .i file of their original project, rather than trying to cut it down as 
> > much as possible, if gcc would just set up everything for mailing upon 
> > first hitting the ICE. I think, if I have to fill everything into a form 
> > like on the web interface, including a description of what is going wrong, 
> > I'm more tempted to isolate the problem. Given the shortage of people 
> > fixing bugs, this seems like something one should encourage.
> 
> Much of cutting down should be automatable (with a little help from the
> compiler to say where statements and declarations are in the source, so
> that trials can be done automatically of removing them as far as possible
> until no ICE can be triggered).  It hardly matters whether this automated
> step is done it the user or developer end, except that doing it at the
> user end may help with some cases where the full source is confidential.
> 
> > PS: Some time ago, Daniel Berlin had this nice copy of the GNATS database 
> > converted to Bugzilla running. There was a long discussion, and the 
> > general consensus seemed to be in favor of switching to Bugzilla. What 
> > happened to that?
> 
> I thought it was waiting on a replacement gcc.gnu.org machine being set up
> first as a test machine (with Bugzilla, and with all the Bugzilla scripts
> and infrastructure in CVS) then later replacing the current system in
> production.

Yes.
This is correct.
Chris Faylor last said sometime in september is when he'd realistically 
get back to working on the replacement machine.

I guess he hasn't yet.