Launchpad itself

Specifying a non-published binary package when filing a bug causes an oops

Bug #31367 reported by Björn Tillenius
160
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Launchpad itself
Fix Released
Medium
Christian Reis

Bug Description

When filing a bug, if you specify a binary package, which hasn't been published yet in the distribution, IDistribution.getPackageNames() raises a NotFoundError, which isn't caught.

Distribution.getPackageNames() raises a NotFoundError in a few different cases, neither is mention in the documentation. At the same time this bug is fixed, the documentation should be updated to reflect the implementation, and tests should be added to ensure that the bug filing code produces appropriate error messages for the different NotFoundErrors.

See OOPS-44D752 for more information.

See original description
Tags: lp-bugs oops
Björn Tillenius (bjornt)
description: updated
Diogo Matsubara (matsubara)
Changed in malone:
status: Unconfirmed → Confirmed
Dafydd Harries (daf)
Changed in malone:
assignee: nobody → matsubara
Revision history for this message
James Henstridge (jamesh) wrote :

One thing that is apparent from this bug's duplicates is that people are trying to file bugs against names provided by a binary package (e.g. filing a bug against "alsa" rather than "alsa-base").

Can we use the soyuz package data to follow these aliases when people try to file bugs?

Revision history for this message
Björn Tillenius (bjornt) wrote : Re: [Bug 31367] Specifying a non-published binary package when filing a bug causes an oops

On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 02:32:43AM -0000, James Henstridge wrote:
> Public bug report changed:
> https://launchpad.net/malone/bugs/31367
>
> Comment:
> One thing that is apparent from this bug's duplicates is that people are
> trying to file bugs against names provided by a binary package (e.g.
> filing a bug against "alsa" rather than "alsa-base").
>
> Can we use the soyuz package data to follow these aliases when people
> try to file bugs?

What do you mean exactly? AFAIK, today it's possible to file a bug
against a binary package, we use the soyuz data to find the
corresponding source package. If the binary package is published it
should work to file a bug against it, it's only the case where it isn't
published that fails.

Revision history for this message
James Henstridge (jamesh) wrote :

If I run "apt-cache show alsa-base", the following is included in the output:
  Provides: alsa

So if the user enters in "alsa" as the package name when filing the bug, would it make sense to change that to "alsa-base" because "alsa-base" provides "alsa"?

Christian Reis (kiko)
Changed in malone:
assignee: matsubara → kiko
Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

I propose a quick fix: if NotFoundError is raised by getPackageNames, refrain from associating the bug report with the package, but warn the user and file it on the distribution instead. Acceptable?

Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Have a patch that works, and a simple test.

Changed in malone:
status: Confirmed → In Progress
Revision history for this message
Christian Reis (kiko) wrote :

Fix now inside PQM.

Changed in malone:
status: In Progress → Fix Committed
Dafydd Harries (daf)
Changed in malone:
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.
Subscribing...

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.