<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "http://bugs.gentoo.org/bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="2.22.7"
          urlbase="http://bugs.gentoo.org/"
          maintainer="bugzilla@gentoo.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>135523</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2006-06-04 08:44 0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>app-portage/herdstat-1.1.91 produces incorrect output for non-developers</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2008-01-20 02:03:50 0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>Gentoo Linux</product>
          <component>Applications</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>All</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>Linux</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>WONTFIX</resolution>
          
          
          
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>minor</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter>jnrowe@gmail.com</reporter>
          <assigned_to>compnerd@gentoo.org</assigned_to>
          <cc>cpp@gentoo.org</cc>

      

      
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jnrowe@gmail.com</who>
            <bug_when>2006-06-04 08:44:32 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>When asking for information on packages with non-developers listed as
maintainers herdstat produces incorrect results.  Yeah, I spotted it while
doing a vanity check :P

  Example output is probably going to be the easiest way to explain the
problem.

  The following output is from herdstat v1.1.91 using libherdstat-0.2.0:

$ herdstat -pd jnrowe
Developer:     jnrowe
Email:         jnrowe@gentoo.org
Packages(2):   app-text/diction
               www-client/surfraw

or possibly:

$ herdstat -pd jnrowe@ukfsn
Developer:     jnrowe@ukfsn
Email:         jnrowe@ukfsn
Packages(2):   app-text/diction
               www-client/surfraw

which is approaching correct, or even:

$ herdstat -pd jnrowe@bughunter
Developer:     jnrowe@bughunter
Email:         jnrowe@bughunter
Packages(2):   app-text/diction
               www-client/surfraw

  Whilst looking in to patching this myself I failed to see why the code
works as it does, so I&apos;ve opted it to leave it to someone who understands
it.  However I noticed while looking that it allows for other incorrect
output because of the handling of @ symbols in the input:

$ herdstat -pd ka0ttic@hopefully_bug_fixer
Developer:      Aaron Walker (ka0ttic@hopefully_bug_fixer)
Email:          ka0ttic@gentoo.org
Packages(98):   app-admin/chroot_safe
                app-admin/metalog
				...

  Although perhaps I&apos;m missing something and this is desired behaviour for
something.

Thanks for your time


James</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>jnrowe@gmail.com</who>
            <bug_when>2006-06-04 08:45:01 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>  The situation is possibly better than with the x86 keyworded 1.1.7_p7 in
the original case:

$ herdstat -pd jnrowe
Failed to find any packages maintained by &apos;jnrowe&apos;.

and:

$ herdstat -pd jnrowe@ukfsn.org
Developer:       jnrowe@ukfsn.org
Email:           jnrowe@ukfsn.org@gentoo.org
Packages(2):     app-text/diction
                 www-client/surfraw

</thetext>
          </long_desc>
          <long_desc isprivate="0">
            <who>halcy0n@gentoo.org</who>
            <bug_when>2008-01-20 02:03:50 0000</bug_when>
            <thetext>Punted this version from the tree.</thetext>
          </long_desc>
      
    </bug>

</bugzilla>