Support and General Use > User Interface and Voice
Bug: Sansa e200V2 simulator ALT+F4 fails
[Saint]:
IIUC there is only a *very* small change between 3.5 and 3.5.1 to cover an issue that (AFAIK) not everyone was experiencing anyway.
3.5 Simulator builds are available here
But, if one wants a build that is *absolutely* current SVN, then Llorean is indeed quite correct, you will need to compile it yourself.
[St.]
Llorean:
Simulator builds based off the latest release version are still simply outdated simulator builds.
There is no released sim.
Basically, bug reports should be against one of two things - a binary we release or currently provide (such as bootloaders or rbutils or the most recent actual Rockbox releases), or the current state of SVN. At the moment, we don't provide simulator binaries, so the bug reports should be against the current code state. If simulator binaries start being provided, that situation may change.
That's basically my point - if you make a bug report against anything but that, it's almost certainly going to get a response "can you reproduce it with the current code" so you should just start from current anyway.
In this case, the problem isn't something that's likely to have been fixed because it's not something anyone's tried to address, but the issue is that reports should always try to meet those conditions because most times they're going to have to anyway.
There's still a question as to whether the current state will even be considered a bug - at the moment it certainly does what the programmers expected it to do, which would qualify relatively clearly as "not a bug" and since there's no documentation for or released sim, nothing is actually working incorrectly. It could easily be closed by a dev as "this is how it's expected to work, file a patch if you want to change it."
The 3.5 simulator is basically useful for building 3.5 compatible WPSes, and for checking things in the 3.5 manual (where they're applicable to a simulator).
chrisjj:
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 04:27:33 PM ---Basically, bug reports should be against one of two things - a binary we release or currently provide (such as bootloaders or rbutils or the most recent actual Rockbox releases), or the current state of SVN.
--- End quote ---
How about making that official (somehow)?
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 04:27:33 PM ---At the moment, we don't provide simulator binaries
--- End quote ---
You don't. Others do.
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 04:27:33 PM ---That's basically my point - if you make a bug report against anything but that, it's almost certainly going to get a response "can you reproduce it with the current code"
--- End quote ---
I think you are mistaken. My reports have not.
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 04:27:33 PM ---There's still a question as to whether the current state will even be considered a bug - at the moment it certainly does what the programmers expected it to do, which would qualify relatively clearly as "not a bug"
--- End quote ---
That would be really stupid, because it would make it impossible for useful reporting to be made by anyone not having knowledge of what the programmer intended.
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 04:27:33 PM --- and since there's no documentation for or released sim
--- End quote ---
You just said the baseline reference was programmer intent. Now you're saying it is documentation??
Anyway you're mistaken. Sim has documentation: http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/UiSimulator .
Llorean:
Again, the WIKI is not official documentation. You've been told this a few times, but continue to refer to is as something having documentation.
Someone other than Rockbox providing builds does not matter. There's hundreds of unsupported builds out there that we don't accept bug reports on, whether they're modified code or unmodified.
The manual documents programmer intent. If something matches the manual, it's working as intended. If something does not match the manual, it's not. If it crashes, corrupts data, or otherwise harms data or prevents itself from being used, it's not working as intended.
If you think it should to X but have no official documentation to back up that it should do X, then you should ask a developer of that part of it "is this how it's supposed to work" before deciding that your assumption about how it's supposed to work is right, and file a bug.
chrisjj:
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 07:35:21 PM ---Again, the WIKI is not official documentation.
--- End quote ---
I didn't say it was.
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 07:35:21 PM ---Someone other than Rockbox providing builds does not matter.
--- End quote ---
"Other than Rockbox". What are you talking about?
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 07:35:21 PM ---The manual documents programmer intent.
--- End quote ---
Except where it doesn't - such as here.
--- Quote from: Llorean on May 05, 2010, 07:35:21 PM ---you should ask a developer of that part of it "is this how it's supposed to work" before deciding that your assumption about how it's supposed to work is right, and file a bug.
--- End quote ---
I have made no assumption. The simulator has keys for Power and Close marked on the UI. That's self-documentation. These keys don't work.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version