From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: debbugs search output [was Re: Bug statistics] Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:51 -0400 Message-ID: <8bpqzfswkg.fsf_-_@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <1focf1eb1p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <874ogsthn2.fsf@red-bean.com> <87vd97hot4.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277431085 23452 80.91.229.12 (25 Jun 2010 01:58:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:58:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Dan Nicolaescu , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 25 03:58:02 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ORyB4-0000n6-WF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:57:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55959 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ORyB4-0005ig-DV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54802 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ORyB0-0005i4-1l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ORyAy-0001HD-KD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:40405) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ORyAy-0001H9-Db for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:52 -0400 Original-Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ORyAx-0004hw-TN; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:57:51 -0400 X-Spook: Project Monarch CIA ISEC North Korea SRI Telex SAPO X-Ran: "1),;Kh5fak5oI{RzG9jw7-g?$iBtAipWgkDiF(kXR'}`n30xYKJX.~'hzNk9Z<5axkD4% X-Hue: blue X-Attribution: GM In-Reply-To: <87vd97hot4.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Thu\, 24 Jun 2010 21\:40\:55 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126384 Archived-At: Karl Fogel wrote: > It would be nice to apply or reject the patches, though. I don't > know how to find them. Doing a search on the tag "patch" (as > suggested by the text "Valid tags are patch, wontfix, moreinfo, > unreproducible, fixed, notabug") claims to find 2006 bugs. Since > that's exactly how many bugs total are in the tracker, it's got to > be wrong. The number "2006" is somewhat misleading, OK; but the actual results, in terms of the bugs displayed beneath this, are correct. I hope this is obvious if you actually *look* at the search results. This is of course off-topic for this thread, but it seems I need to explain this now... Standard debbugs does not do any limitation of the amount of bugs it displays. Trying to view the bugs in the "emacs" package, the machine would try to display 2000+ bugs and run out of memory. (It shares this aspect of the Bazaar design philosophy.) Since there is a link to all the emacs bugs on every bug report page, this was something of a problem. So I added a very crude hack limiting it to display 400 bugs maximum at once. It is dumb in the sense that the 400 filter is applied *before* the search is carried out. In other words, it only searches the first 400 open emacs reports at a time. It may not find any matches for your search there. This is obviously not ideal, but it was the fix I was able to implement at the time, because I could not understand the code any better. At most, you will have to page through 5 pages of search results to see all the bugs tagged patch. I hope this is not too onerous, and I doubt this is the limiting factor in these patches not being applied yet. Patches for debbugs welcome, if anyone would like to help improve this. Or indeed anything else.