[Bug 38575] New: https://bugs.winehq.org/enter_bug.cgi should list Distribution package bugtrackers, for example, for Fedora.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Bug ID: 38575 Summary: https://bugs.winehq.org/enter_bug.cgi should list Distribution package bugtrackers, for example, for Fedora. Product: WineHQ.org Version: unspecified Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: www-unknown Assignee: wine-bugs@winehq.org Reporter: linards.liepins@gmail.com Distribution: ---
Recently I have found very ****ing great surprise from Fedora repository called wine-staging packages.
After explanation from other users, this is 'vanilla' wine + hundreds of patches.
So, generally, it means each and every user using Fedora, are not eligible to submit bugs to winehq bugzilla. Same as if you use PlayOnLinux or anything else similar.
So, to avoid spam of such bugs into winehq.org bugzilla instance, I suggest to add link or even section 'Distribution specific', that then would list external bugzilla trackers, for example, this:
https://bugs.wine-staging.com/
Original thread:
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30608
Note of this bug:
Originally it was reported on 'vanilla' wine. Retesting, obviously, was done on Staging.
Note of the page itself:
There are some typo erros in this string: 'Submit broken links and other web related isssues.'
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Linards linards.liepins@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|www-unknown |bugzilla-unknown Version|unspecified |3.2.3 Product|WineHQ.org |WineHQ Bugzilla
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Sebastian Lackner sebastian@fds-team.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sebastian@fds-team.de
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #1 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- http://wiki.winehq.org/Bugs has a warning not to file bugs for these sort of things, but as with other warnings, many users ignore.
It's not exactly feasible for us to keep track of what every distribution does, you should report bugs in your distribution to your distribution, not to third party software.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #2 from Linards linards.liepins@gmail.com --- (In reply to Austin English from comment #1)
http://wiki.winehq.org/Bugs has a warning not to file bugs for these sort of things, but as with other warnings, many users ignore.
It's not exactly feasible for us to keep track of what every distribution does, you should report bugs in your distribution to your distribution, not to third party software.
I see.
You mean this; You tested with a clean Wine directory (default location: "~/.wine", z: drive -> / link exists, no DLL overrides).'? Maybe someone update it with note that it also applies to non-patched Wine builds? 'Clean' might be misleading, but 'plain' is simply slang, so new user might think they are reporting valid bugs...
Anyways, thank you for your professionalism, Austin. WineHQ shows great example in end-user support.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #3 from Rosanne DiMesio dimesio@earthlink.net --- (In reply to Austin English from comment #1)
http://wiki.winehq.org/Bugs has a warning not to file bugs for these sort of things, but as with other warnings, many users ignore.
In the case of Fedora, I think most users aren't even aware that they are using wine-staging. The package is named "wine," not "wine-staging," and looking at the console output posted yesterday in bug 30608, I don't see the warning about not reporting bugs here that used to be part of the build.
(In reply to Linards from comment #2)
You mean this; You tested with a clean Wine directory (default location: "~/.wine", z: drive -> / link exists, no DLL overrides).'? Maybe someone update it with note that it also applies to non-patched Wine builds? '
You didn't read far enough; the page already addresses that:
"You haven't modified Wine in any way (i.e. you are using a prepackaged binary without any custom patches or modifications) or built from the official WineHQ source by doing: "./configure ; make depend ; make")"
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #4 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- (In reply to Rosanne DiMesio from comment #3)
(In reply to Austin English from comment #1)
http://wiki.winehq.org/Bugs has a warning not to file bugs for these sort of things, but as with other warnings, many users ignore.
In the case of Fedora, I think most users aren't even aware that they are using wine-staging. The package is named "wine," not "wine-staging," and looking at the console output posted yesterday in bug 30608, I don't see the warning about not reporting bugs here that used to be part of the build.
Apparently that only shows on the first launch of a process in a prefix; if another program was started and wineserver was running, launching a second process won't show that warning (or it was manually removed).
But yes, I agree; Fedora could and should make that distinction more visible to its users. E.g., their wiki doesn't mention staging, and directs users to WineHQ's bug tracker: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Wine?rd=AndreasBierfert/Wine
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #5 from Linards linards.liepins@gmail.com --- (In reply to Austin English from comment #4)
(In reply to Rosanne DiMesio from comment #3)
(In reply to Austin English from comment #1)
http://wiki.winehq.org/Bugs has a warning not to file bugs for these sort of things, but as with other warnings, many users ignore.
In the case of Fedora, I think most users aren't even aware that they are using wine-staging. The package is named "wine," not "wine-staging," and looking at the console output posted yesterday in bug 30608, I don't see the warning about not reporting bugs here that used to be part of the build.
Apparently that only shows on the first launch of a process in a prefix; if another program was started and wineserver was running, launching a second process won't show that warning (or it was manually removed).
But yes, I agree; Fedora could and should make that distinction more visible to its users. E.g., their wiki doesn't mention staging, and directs users to WineHQ's bug tracker: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Wine?rd=AndreasBierfert/Wine
Well, the starting point for you could be to do this ( from the wiki ):
"Updates-Testing
If you use the version of wine in the updates-testing repository then please log into bodhi and comment on the build, including any problems that may be in the packaging, naming, or elsewhere. The build needs positive karma to be pushed to the updates repository."
Also note, that page has not been update from more than a year.(In reply to Rosanne DiMesio from comment #3)
(In reply to Linards from comment #2)
You mean this; You tested with a clean Wine directory (default location: "~/.wine", z: drive -> / link exists, no DLL overrides).'? Maybe someone update it with note that it also applies to non-patched Wine builds? '
You didn't read far enough; the page already addresses that:
"You haven't modified Wine in any way (i.e. you are using a prepackaged binary without any custom patches or modifications) or built from the official WineHQ source by doing: "./configure ; make depend ; make")"
Oh, my apologies, Mis. Yes, it is addressed. Thank you.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #6 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- I will update the Fedora wiki to provide current information. We have only recently started using wine-staging.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #7 from Austin English austinenglish@gmail.com --- (In reply to Michael Cronenworth from comment #6)
I will update the Fedora wiki to provide current information. We have only recently started using wine-staging.
Thanks.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
winetest@luukku.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |winetest@luukku.com
--- Comment #8 from winetest@luukku.com --- This issue is at least partly solved now. Staging bugs can be opened here.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
--- Comment #9 from Linards linards.liepins@gmail.com --- Thank you all. I believe we can closet his one as for now the bug entry is really in good shape.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Carlo B castro8583bennett@gmx.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |castro8583bennett@gmx.com
--- Comment #10 from Carlo B castro8583bennett@gmx.com --- Thank you guys its working fine with me
Castro B, https://sparpedia.no
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #11 from Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com --- Fixed
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38575
Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #12 from Ken Sharp imwellcushtymelike@gmail.com --- Closing
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org -
WineHQ Bugzilla