Bug#766732: For clarification: re "non serious data loss"

[Brian Drummond]

On Wed, 2014-10-29 at 20:56 +0100, intrigeri wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Brian Drummond wrote (25 Oct 2014 12:32:42 GMT) :
> > The "non serious data loss" may be a misnomer. It is my assessment
> > because, if one assumes that a copy finished correctly when it actually
> > terminated, the client machine is left with an incomplete data set.
> 
> Indeed, in my book this doesn't qualify as RC => downgrading severity.

No problem.

> (And: thanks for the detailed debugging!)

I'm trying. Still haven't found a way to identify who owns the
segfaulting "pool" process, but I haven't given up.

Thanks,

- Brian