View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0005542 | Taler | obsolete component | public | 2019-02-04 21:29 | 2019-12-20 18:12 |
| Reporter | Christian Grothoff | Assigned To | Marcello Stanisci | Resolution deadline | |
| Implementer | Reviewer | ||||
| Release signed by | Deployed by | ||||
| Verifier | Communicator | ||||
| Data protection authority notification required | No | ||||
| CSIRT notification required | No | ||||
| Estimated effort (hours) | Actual effort (hours) | 0 | |||
| Fast-track | No | ||||
| Work package | none | ||||
| Priority | urgent | Severity | crash | Reproducibility | have not tried |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Platform | i7 | OS | Debian GNU/Linux | OS Version | squeeze |
| Product Version | git (master) | ||||
| Target Version | 0.6 | Fixed in Version | 0.6 | ||
| Summary | 0005542: bank assertion failure reported on twitter | ||||
| Description | https://twitter.com/davidak/status/1086430279911256064 | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Theoretically, it's all "okay": with numbers too big a assert failure happens, and that's what happened here. OF COURSE, this is not the right way to react to it, and needs to be handled properly. | |
| Yes, we should (1) test first and generate a nice(r) error message, and (2) deploy the bank without infinite negative money (is this because 0.5 didn't have the limit implemented?) so that such extreme balances can't easily be produced. | |
| e5e6d7c1c4852757e29481 hot-fixes (1). It's already deployed, so you can try. As of (2), we deliberately opted for infinite negative balance for the bank (0.5 does have limit implemented), I suspect because we award 100 kudos to new users and it was just easier to do this way. Of course we can award the 100 kudos to the first N users who register after a new release, and avoid the infinite limit for the bank; but I'm not sure that's worth doing this ("thanks" to those infinite limits we can discover new bugs.) | |
| Changing to "solved" by the way, as this strictly speaking is. | |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-02-04 21:29 | Christian Grothoff | New Issue | |
| 2019-02-04 21:29 | Christian Grothoff | Status | new => assigned |
| 2019-02-04 21:29 | Christian Grothoff | Assigned To | => Marcello Stanisci |
| 2019-02-05 13:39 | Marcello Stanisci | Note Added: 0013602 | |
| 2019-02-05 14:46 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0013603 | |
| 2019-02-05 15:35 | Marcello Stanisci | Note Added: 0013604 | |
| 2019-02-05 15:42 | Marcello Stanisci | Note Added: 0013605 | |
| 2019-02-05 15:43 | Marcello Stanisci | Status | assigned => informing |
| 2019-02-05 15:43 | Marcello Stanisci | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2019-02-12 22:18 | Christian Grothoff | Fixed in Version | => 0.6 |
| 2019-12-20 18:12 | Christian Grothoff | Status | informing => closed |
| 2022-08-23 18:26 | Christian Grothoff | Category | bank (demonstrator) => py bank (demonstrator, obsolete) |
| 2023-12-03 00:23 | Christian Grothoff | Category | py bank (demonstrator, obsolete) => obsolete componet |
| 2023-12-11 19:08 | Florian Dold | Category | obsolete componet => obsolete component |