244522 2010-07-13 19:35:37 +0000 Dr Konqui sometimes lists false possible duplicates 2019-12-15 10:52:30 +0000 1 1 2 Applications drkonqi general unspecified Debian unstable Linux RESOLVED INVALID NOR wishlist --- 0 eljefedelito unassigned-bugs-null mail sitter 0 oldest_to_newest 989549 0 eljefedelito 2010-07-13 19:35:37 +0000 Version: unspecified (using KDE 4.4.4) OS: Linux Amarok crashed and I clicked on a report that (per the Subject) looked like a duplicate: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=240416 I was asked to create a new bug report so I did, here: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=244520 but in the initial report I was told they're completely different (so why did Dr Konqui bring the option of duplicates?) and I was told the Dr Konqui attachment wasn't searchable, which seems silly. Reproducible: Didn't try Steps to Reproduce: Find a bug. Suggest that one may be a duplicate but if it isn't nothing stops you Actual Results: The bug is reported as a duplicate and the backtrace is attached. Expected Results: Backtraces are compared and the likelyhood of a duplicate is rated, or those that have different backtraces are filtered out. Also, the backtrace should be searchable text (not attachments I guess)for the KDE and app developers. Thanks for KDE, I am just hoping to make this tool a bit more usable for everyone involved. 989555 1 andresbajotierra 2010-07-13 19:51:09 +0000 Those are different bugs/problems: - Text Attachments not being searchable is a Bugzilla limitation. In any case, for KDE SC 4.5, part of the backtrace is also pasted inline; so that part can be found by the standard search method; and the full backtrace is still attached as a file. (so, that bug is FIXED) - DrKonqi told you that it was a similar bug, because some functions mentioned in your backtrace (your Amarok crash) were found in bug 240416; however, due another bugzilla limitation, we can't determine if the functions are in the same order (that would help us to guarantee it is a real duplicate and not a false positive like in this case). A possible solution would be, for every report listed as "possible duplicate", DrKonqi could try to fully download it and compare the backtraces properly; so it could be able to determine if it is a real duplicate. However, that will cause a lot of CPU/Bandwidth usage for the Bugzilla server; so I don't know if it will worthy to implement. (considering that the cases of false positives are rather minimum) Regards Dario A. (former DrKonqi dev) 1896556 2 sitter 2019-12-15 10:52:30 +0000 As mentioned, solving this comes at an unreasonable cost to bandwidth and processing power which in the end means reporting takes much longer in general. This seems like a bad trade.