bdmurray | That's my hope. ;) | 00:00 |
---|---|---|
owh | Hmm, that deals with a single bug for a single package, but the one I'm dealing with is a single bug that affects at present 10 packages with individual patches attached. | 00:04 |
owh | I'm not sure it's appropriate to add 10 bug reports. | 00:04 |
secretlondon | it is, they'd like the patches I'm sure | 00:05 |
secretlondon | and they'll go to ten different maintainers | 00:06 |
owh | Especially since the patches depend on a single patch in lsb, that is, until lsb has been approved/applied, the rest won't work. | 00:06 |
secretlondon | I would rather have the patches, and let me make that decision | 00:06 |
secretlondon | with my upstream hat on, we tend to be a bit tardy about giving up patches | 00:07 |
owh | I understand, but the patch will make no sense if it isn't related if you know what I mean. That's why we reported it the way we have. | 00:09 |
owh | How with the maintainer for apache for example deal with the patch I supply if the lsb patch hasn't been applied? | 00:10 |
secretlondon | you tell them this in the bug report | 00:10 |
owh | Are you saying that the best way is to lodge the lsb bug and refer to it in 9 other bugs? | 00:11 |
kirkland | owh: i'd definitely like to see the lsb function patch applied first | 00:11 |
kirkland | owh: perhaps we should gate on that.... | 00:11 |
owh | kirkland: I agree, and for the rest here, kirkland and I are working together on this bug. | 00:11 |
secretlondon | ok | 00:12 |
owh | kirkland: So, log the lsb bug + patch, wait until it's accepted, then submit the rest? | 00:12 |
secretlondon | you could ask debian, all the DDs I know are idle currently | 00:12 |
owh | secretlondon: In #debian, or somewhere else where there is less chatter? | 00:12 |
* owh recalls that #debian moved to different irc servers also. | 00:13 | |
secretlondon | owh I don't know, I've always asked contacts | 00:13 |
owh | secretlondon: I don't know what you mean. | 00:13 |
secretlondon | owh as in found out who is responsible and then contacted them directly | 00:14 |
owh | So, locate the maintainer for lsb-base, talk to them first? | 00:14 |
secretlondon | in the same way that asking in #ubuntu would probably be less useful | 00:14 |
secretlondon | owh yes, and you can find that out via packages.debian.org | 00:14 |
* owh is already looking. | 00:14 | |
owh | Looks like chris lawrence. | 00:15 |
=== iceman is now known as gluck | ||
=== gluck is now known as Iceman | ||
=== Iceman is now known as gluck | ||
greg-g | secretlondon: ready for some dupes concerning the new restricted modules package? bug 211066 :) | 00:34 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 211066 in linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24 "[2.6.24-14] Cannot upgrade linux-restricted-modules-generic" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/211066 | 00:34 |
secretlondon | eek | 00:34 |
* secretlondon finishes submitting a bug (elsewhere) | 00:34 | |
LaserJock | secretlondon: hi | 00:35 |
LaserJock | secretlondon: thanks for working on the tuxpaint bugs :-) | 00:35 |
secretlondon | hi LaserJock | 00:35 |
secretlondon | LaserJock, no problem : | 00:35 |
secretlondon | :) | 00:35 |
secretlondon | I remade the debdiffs, after working out what they should be with the tuxpaint DD | 00:36 |
LaserJock | and I saw ogra uploaded them today | 00:36 |
secretlondon | oh cool :D | 00:36 |
* secretlondon thinks that's her first patch in main :) | 00:37 | |
LaserJock | well keep 'em comin' | 00:40 |
secretlondon | :) | 00:41 |
LaserJock | if you need an upload of edu stuff feel free to ping me | 00:41 |
LaserJock | I totally overlooked the first debdiff you did | 00:41 |
LaserJock | then I was going back through my bugmail and noticed you were politely waiting | 00:42 |
secretlondon | LaserJock: thanks, I will do | 00:42 |
greg-g | hmm, it isn't as bad as I thought it was going to be (the dupe level of the restricted modules package) | 01:12 |
greg-g | oh well, better to be safe than sorry | 01:13 |
secretlondon | it is 1 am in the uk, 2am in europe | 01:13 |
JohnPhys | any idea when that package will be uploaded/fixed? | 01:13 |
greg-g | good point :) | 01:13 |
secretlondon | I'd expect a flood of them 9am ish | 01:13 |
greg-g | JohnPhys: soon: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/hardy-changes/2008-April/010318.html | 01:13 |
secretlondon | although I'm guessing they may present as X hardware doesn't work | 01:14 |
greg-g | right | 01:14 |
secretlondon | or even a package manager error (?0 | 01:15 |
greg-g | yeah, I think I have one like that, I am just waiting for confirmation from the reporter | 01:15 |
JohnPhys | greg-g: thanks! | 01:16 |
greg-g | JohnPhys: np | 01:22 |
greg-g | does anyone know if the "why is my home directory accessible by other users?" issue has a "master" bug? | 05:07 |
bdmurray | greg-g: keescook would know but I'm guessing there isn't a bug report that is open for that | 05:12 |
greg-g | bdmurray: yeah, I figured | 05:13 |
greg-g | I have a temporary wishlisted bug which I have 2 others pointing to | 05:13 |
greg-g | bdmurray: just fyi, in case you are wondering, it is bug 204577 | 05:14 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 204577 in ubuntu "The default umask should be set to 077. XDG_PUBLICSHARE_DIR should have umask 022" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/204577 | 05:14 |
=== bdmurray changed the topic of #ubuntu-bugs to: Hug Day! https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20080403 | Ubuntu BugSquad | http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad | Documentation: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/HelpingWithBugs | If you have been triaging bugs for a while, please apply to https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol/ - http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad | ||
=== asac_ is now known as asac | ||
mib_d2yw3jo6 | hola | 06:56 |
mib_d2yw3jo6 | alguna persona | 06:56 |
mib_d2yw3jo6 | qie me pueda ayudar | 06:56 |
mib_d2yw3jo6 | a instalar | 06:56 |
mib_d2yw3jo6 | el ubuntu a mi maquina | 06:56 |
mib_d2yw3jo6 | spps | 06:56 |
Arby | mvo: just the person. What's the proper response to bugs like bug 196261 | 08:02 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 196261 in update-manager "Could not calculate the upgrade" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/196261 | 08:02 |
Arby | it looks like broken dependancies which says packaging issue to me | 08:02 |
Arby | probably because hardy is a moving target | 08:03 |
Arby | is that correct? | 08:03 |
mvo | hey Arby! | 08:03 |
mvo | Arby: let me have a look | 08:03 |
mvo | Arby: yeah, if the problem of duncan (or ccfl2ler) still persists after ~ day or two, then its something we should have a closer look, but its likely that its something transitional | 08:05 |
Arby | mvo: ok, I'll leave a comment to that effect | 08:05 |
mvo | thanks a lot Arby! | 08:10 |
Arby | no problem | 08:10 |
Arby | I had intennded to do more recently but my primary machie is busted :( | 08:10 |
mvo | oh, sorry to hear that, a hardware problem? | 08:11 |
Arby | broken screen | 08:14 |
Arby | on my laptop which is my main machine | 08:14 |
Arby | still runs just can't see anything | 08:14 |
=== janet is now known as pschulz01 | ||
Lhademmor | Hi, I've several times attempted to help out the BugSquad by triaging, but every time I've had to give up. Mostly because a) I have trouble understanding the posted error logs and b) I often don't know which packages/teams to assign... | 12:16 |
Lhademmor | But hey, I've made my first contribution to a bug day by marking bug 195319 invalid :D | 12:17 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 195319 in firefox-3.0 "firefox-3.0 crashes on icanhascheezburger.com" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/195319 | 12:17 |
Lhademmor | btw rpedro_, I only received your announcement about the April 1st Bug Day (through ubuntu-devel-announce) yesterday - when it was all over :( | 12:19 |
pochu | Lhademmor: you should subscribe to ubuntu-bugsquad then :) | 12:20 |
Lhademmor | pochu, is it a high volume list? I don't want to get spammed like back when I subscribed to the official ubuntu support list... | 12:21 |
Lhademmor | :O | 12:21 |
pochu | Lhademmor: 15 to 50 messages per month in the last 5 months... it depends if there's some topic to discuss, or just announcements :) | 12:23 |
pochu | according to https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/ | 12:23 |
Lhademmor | pochu, ok then I'm on it :) | 12:25 |
Lhademmor | hmm... I'm running Fx 3.0b4 - anyone running that who can see the band photo on http://metal-archives.com/band.php?id=97 ? | 12:31 |
Lhademmor | Is it bug day today? | 12:35 |
james_w | yep | 12:35 |
Lhademmor | Okay then - not many people active here? | 12:36 |
james_w | it will start picking up soon probably | 12:36 |
james_w | a lot of people don't discuss the bugs on the channel though | 12:37 |
Lhademmor | Damn - probably around the time I have to head home.. | 12:37 |
Lhademmor | Where do they discuss them then? | 12:37 |
Lhademmor | Well... then I can have all the support for myself :P | 12:38 |
Lhademmor | Have I handled the bug 196432 correct? | 12:39 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 196432 in firefox-3.0 "firfox elements in igoogle banner" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/196432 | 12:39 |
james_w | Lhademmor: for your first question I can see a picture on the right at the top of the page, is that the one that you refer to? | 12:40 |
Lhademmor | james_w: I'm sorry, I don't understand... what question? | 12:41 |
Lhademmor | Ah, now I found it | 12:41 |
james_w | wow, that's a strange screenshot in the second one. | 12:41 |
Lhademmor | james_w, the one with a bunch of old men with sunglasses | 12:41 |
james_w | It think asking for a reconfirmation with the latest version is ok there. | 12:42 |
james_w | yep, they're pretty old | 12:42 |
Lhademmor | james_w, okay. Damn, then it must be a problem on my side.... | 12:42 |
Lhademmor | I cannot see the image (or any other band images from that site) on firefox - only when using other computers) | 12:43 |
james_w | Lhademmor: you haven't blocked images from the site or anything? | 12:45 |
james_w | does it still happen with a new profile> | 12:45 |
asac | hi! | 12:45 |
Iulian | Hey | 12:46 |
Lhademmor | I dont think so, no | 12:46 |
Lhademmor | (to the first question) | 12:46 |
james_w | hi asac, just the man we need | 12:46 |
asac | ;) | 12:46 |
james_w | hi Iulian | 12:46 |
Lhademmor | james_w, how do I change profiles? | 12:46 |
Iulian | Hello james_w, asac | 12:46 |
james_w | Lhademmor: I don't know, we should have the information on the debugging page | 12:47 |
james_w | Lhademmor: check Edit->Preferences, Content tab, second "Exceptions" button, the one for "Load images automatically" | 12:47 |
james_w | check there is nothing in there. | 12:47 |
james_w | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Bugs?action=show&redirect=DebuggingFirefox | 12:48 |
Lhademmor | james_w: nope, nothing there | 12:48 |
james_w | Lhademmor: ok, worth a try | 12:48 |
james_w | that link explains how to set up a new profile | 12:48 |
Lhademmor | ok, thanks | 12:49 |
Lhademmor | And otherwise I'll just wait for it to come out of beta :) | 12:49 |
asac | Lhademmor: whats this about? black images? | 12:50 |
Lhademmor | asac, yep | 12:50 |
asac | which site? | 12:50 |
Lhademmor | and half-opened, jumbled ones | 12:50 |
asac | yeah | 12:50 |
Lhademmor | http://metal-archives.com/band.php?id=97 f.ex | 12:51 |
Lhademmor | there's a big black hole on the right side of the page | 12:51 |
asac | zooming changes it? | 12:51 |
asac | for me zooming in makes the image on the right appear | 12:52 |
Lhademmor | asac, same thing here | 12:52 |
asac | i guess there should be lots of dupes for that bug | 12:54 |
asac | its bug 182038 | 12:54 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 182038 in xorg-server "Black rectangle instead of image in FF3 [Hardy]" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/182038 | 12:54 |
asac | please merge bugs into that | 12:54 |
asac | (which is a xulrunner bug after all) | 12:55 |
asac | merge == mark as duplicate | 12:55 |
asac | https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/?field.searchtext=black&orderby=-importance&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch=&field.has_no_package= | 12:56 |
asac | those are likely NEW dupes | 12:56 |
asac | so if you have reports about broken images on websites, please add xulrunner-1.9 as target and mark as duplicate of bug 182038 | 12:57 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 182038 in xorg-server "Black rectangle instead of image in FF3 [Hardy]" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/182038 | 12:57 |
Lhademmor | ok then! | 12:57 |
Lhademmor | that's one dupemarked :) | 13:00 |
asac | i think we cannot do much about crashes except asking them to test with a fresh profile and then for a test-case to reproduce | 13:09 |
asac | if there is no test-case and the stacktrace doesn't have any symbols we can just set it to invalid | 13:10 |
Lhademmor | damn, I'm off... May return later - depending on whether there're riots in the street or not.. | 13:11 |
asac | riots= | 13:11 |
asac | where are you bsed? | 13:11 |
asac | based | 13:11 |
Lhademmor | Denmark :P | 13:11 |
Lhademmor | So no, not riots THAT serious | 13:11 |
asac | hehe | 13:12 |
asac | hope so :) | 13:12 |
asac | i am in hamburg and wouldn't like the riots to come down here | 13:12 |
asac | :-P | 13:12 |
pedro_ | hello people ! | 13:22 |
pedro_ | today is firefox hug day https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20080403 feel free to grab any of the list | 13:23 |
asac | hi pedro_ i dropped some basic instructinos about New processing in the hug page | 13:23 |
asac | i think there are more cases ... but just to get started | 13:23 |
pedro_ | asac: ok cool | 13:23 |
asac | if you don't want that content in there let me know ... we can find a different place | 13:23 |
pedro_ | asac: is this possible to do ? bug 195109 | 13:24 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 195109 in firefox-3.0 "Firefox is not compatible with GNOME session manager" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/195109 | 13:24 |
pedro_ | asac: that's ok thanks you ;-) | 13:24 |
asac | pedro_: i think upstream knows about this, but its unclear what is needed for that | 13:24 |
asac | pedro_: actually i am not sure if it really doesn't work. can you confirm that? | 13:28 |
pedro_ | asac: let me check, give me a min | 13:29 |
asac | pedro_: i said it above as well ... everything that claims that images are rendered wrong is dupe of bug 182038 | 13:29 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 182038 in xorg-server "Black rectangle instead of image in FF3 [Hardy]" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/182038 | 13:29 |
asac | maybe we should add those "master bugs" to the page as well? | 13:29 |
pedro_ | yeah, let me add it | 13:32 |
asac | pedro_: e.g. bug 209953 is dupe of 182038 | 13:32 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 209953 in firefox-3.0 "Large image is corrupted when zoomed out (dup-of: 207597)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/209953 | 13:32 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 207597 in firefox-3.0 "picture scales not propperly to fit screen" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/207597 | 13:32 |
pedro_ | bug 195109 works fine for me, just tested it | 13:33 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 195109 in firefox-3.0 "Firefox is not compatible with GNOME session manager" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/195109 | 13:33 |
asac | pedro_: good. i think you can invalidate it | 13:33 |
asac | might have been an intermediate problem | 13:33 |
pedro_ | yeah i'm doing it now | 13:33 |
asac | as its old | 13:33 |
asac | anyone having a non-querty keyboard can check if bug 193877 is still present? | 13:34 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 193877 in firefox-3.0 "C-z undo keyboard binding doesn't respect non-qwerty layout" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/193877 | 13:34 |
asac | pedro_: i think a good thing would be to add a list of currently open blockers to that page ... those are good targets to merge in dupes | 13:35 |
asac | for example bug 196933 is dupe of bug 185622 (which is a blocker) | 13:36 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 196933 in firefox-3.0 "firefox keeps asking to be default browser when it should not" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/196933 | 13:36 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 185622 in firefox-3.0 "Firefox 3 doesn't act as the default browser" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/185622 | 13:36 |
asac | i think the list of blockers and maybe adding the triaged + in progress and fix committed ones to a short list would be good | 13:37 |
asac | should be still short enough to easily check if a bug is a dupe of any of those developer-confirmed bugs | 13:37 |
asac | (those are suggestions for future package-hug-days ... not today) | 13:38 |
pedro_ | yep totally | 13:38 |
asac | see what ends up in firefox : bug 185622 | 13:52 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 185622 in firefox-3.0 "Firefox 3 doesn't act as the default browser" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/185622 | 13:52 |
asac | pedro_: can you reassign that? | 13:52 |
asac | (no idea where to) | 13:52 |
pedro_ | asac: ok, let me look at it | 13:55 |
asac | pedro_: its on the wiki page (in case you want to claim it) | 13:58 |
asac | pedro_: you triaged, but didn't claim bug 209981 :) | 14:01 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 209981 in firefox-3.0 "firefox crashed with SIGSEGV in __kernel_vsyscall()" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/209981 | 14:01 |
pedro_ | claimed now :-) | 14:03 |
caberg | Anyone some control the alsa-defaultsettings? please fix https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/126150 | 14:04 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 126150 in ubuntu "Headphone Jack Sense not enabled " [Undecided,New] | 14:04 |
asac | james_w: i always find myself typgin --builder='dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -b' (or -S -sa/-si) in bzr builddeb ... why do I need to do that? | 14:08 |
asac | james_w: i think my question has two corners: 1. why is there no --binary (or better -b) ... 2. why isn't bzr bd using dpkg-buildpackage by default? | 14:08 |
james_w | 2. I thought it did | 14:11 |
james_w | dpkg-buildpackage -uc -us -rfakeroot | 14:12 |
asac | maybe ... could be that i started with this habit because i had no way to build binaries only. i am not even sure that just bzr bd --merge will sign my packages | 14:13 |
asac | yeah | 14:13 |
asac | so it doesn't sign :( | 14:13 |
james_w | ah, perhaps I should just make it debuild or something | 14:13 |
asac | james_w: please use dpkg-buildpackage because it injects CFLAGS that are not in debuild | 14:13 |
james_w | ah, I thought that debuild was just a wrapper around -buildpackage | 14:13 |
asac | james_w: i found that recently when i still typed --builder='debuild -b' and didn't see a crash that happened with dpkg-buildpacakge | 14:14 |
asac | james_w: yeah ... but either it excludes the default FLAGS or it doesn't use it at all | 14:14 |
james_w | I might add --builder-opts so you can just do --builder-opts "-b" or "-sa" or similar | 14:14 |
asac | james_w: i think its valid to maybe not sign a package by default | 14:14 |
james_w | though a --binary may also be useful | 14:15 |
asac | but we should add a --sign flag then that i can use bazaar.config | 14:15 |
asac | (i always wanna sign ... i use gpg-agent so i don't need to type the passphrase frequently) | 14:15 |
james_w | I want to avoid duplicating every dpkg-buildpackage option, but I realise there are common things that should be covered. | 14:15 |
asac | builder-opts sounds good | 14:16 |
asac | i could also use -kasac@debian.org ... so i will always sponsor | 14:16 |
asac | james_w: ok so maybe --builder-opts would be good ... and maybe a --builder-base="dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot | debuild" | 14:17 |
james_w | yeah, it should probably be additional somehow, so you can have that as default, and then you could add -sa on the command line. | 14:17 |
asac | or maybe a --lintian option | 14:17 |
asac | because i think debuild just does run that | 14:17 |
asac | james_w: yes. -sa vs. -si (default) would be great | 14:18 |
asac | together with --binarly | 14:18 |
asac | ;) | 14:18 |
asac | -b | 14:18 |
james_w | this is something I want to talk to people about at UDS, to get an idea of what are the common operations people do, so I'll make sure to ask you | 14:19 |
asac | james_w: i prefer clean flags, but also convenience switches ... like passing -sa -si -b directly (without typing --builder-opts=...) | 14:20 |
asac | james_w: but lets defer that until UDS | 14:20 |
james_w | sure | 14:21 |
asac | its just that everytime i type that i wonder why i actually have to do that ;) | 14:21 |
asac | wihtout setting up helper scripts/aliases | 14:21 |
qense | happy bug day everyone! | 15:33 |
pedro_ | hey qense, to you too :-) | 15:34 |
=== x-spec-t is now known as Spec | ||
saivann | Hi everyone, I'm currently looking at bug 199215 in gnome-mount and I suspect that the good package name should be gvfs, can someone help me finding the good package? | 17:50 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 199215 in gnome-mount "[hardy] SD card does not mount Dell Inspiron 9300" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/199215 | 17:50 |
james_w | saivann: there is a package named gvfs, is that what you mean? | 17:53 |
saivann | james_w : I'm asking myself if bug 199215 is a gvfs bug or a gnome-mount bug | 17:54 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 199215 in gnome-mount "[hardy] SD card does not mount Dell Inspiron 9300" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/199215 | 17:54 |
saivann | james_w : gvfs is a package, yes | 17:55 |
james_w | saivann: ah, I don't know. The fact that you don't get a desktop icon suggest gvfs, as that is what would normally mount it. | 17:55 |
bddebian | Boo | 17:55 |
saivann | james_w : Thanks, I will open the bug in gvfs too | 17:56 |
james_w | hi bddebian | 17:57 |
james_w | saivann: I would just re-assign it I think | 17:57 |
saivann | james_w : You're right, that's what I did | 17:57 |
james_w | great | 17:57 |
bddebian | Hello james_w | 17:57 |
bdmurray | saivann: Did you see the update to the DebuggingUsplash page? | 17:57 |
saivann | bdmurray : No, I tought that I was subscribed to this page, but apparently not | 17:58 |
saivann | bdmurray : Reading it.. | 17:58 |
saivann | bdmurray : If I understand this correctly, I would change "On x86 hardware, compare the behavior of usplash between a 32bit LiveCD and a 64bit LiveCD" to "On amd64 hardware, compare the behavior of usplash between a 32bit LiveCD and a 64bit LiveCD" | 18:00 |
saivann | bdmurray : Since usplash use x86emu and has more chances to get into problems, but I might be wrong | 18:01 |
bdmurray | saivann: Yes, that sounds correct. I think "x86_64" would be the most correct though. | 18:01 |
bdmurray | keescook would know best though | 18:02 |
saivann | bdmurray : Also we should not ask for lspci -nnvv, but sudo lspci -nnvv, like described in the kernel debug wiki page | 18:02 |
bdmurray | keescook: is that what you intended? | 18:02 |
bdmurray | saivann: true, could you make those changes? | 18:03 |
saivann | bdmurray : I do it right now, thanks for your advice | 18:03 |
keescook | bdmurray: yeah, that's clearer. I'd try to avoid "x86_64" since that's more technical. | 18:03 |
keescook | "On 64bit x86 hardware ..." ? | 18:03 |
bdmurray | That sounds good to me | 18:04 |
bdmurray | saivann: If you have any other questions about usplash keescook is the person to ask - I think. ;) | 18:04 |
saivann | bdmurray : Oh thanks :) | 18:04 |
* keescook cries a little | 18:04 | |
keescook | yeah, ask me -- I might not know the answer, but I can use that opportunity to go pick someone else's brain and find it. :) | 18:05 |
saivann | keescook : I triaged a lot of bugs in usplash, if you see that I could improve what I do in any ways, don't hesitate to tell me :) | 18:05 |
saivann | keescook : :P | 18:05 |
keescook | saivann: okay, cool. | 18:06 |
bdmurray | saivann: Do you want to be added to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad/Contacts for usplash? | 18:06 |
afflux | hi | 18:06 |
bdmurray | afflux: hello! | 18:06 |
afflux | hi bdmurray! | 18:06 |
saivann | bdmurray : Please, yes | 18:07 |
saivann | bdmurray : That would be great | 18:07 |
bdmurray | saivann: I've added you thanks! | 18:09 |
saivann | bdmurray : That's great | 18:09 |
=== doko_ is now known as doko | ||
LaserJock | bdmurray: quick question. What permissions does ~ubuntu-bugcontrol have? | 20:08 |
bdmurray | LaserJock: Importance and Won't Fix | 20:09 |
LaserJock | I seem to remember there being a ubuntu-qa team. is that gone? | 20:10 |
jjesse | i think it was renamed? | 20:11 |
LaserJock | to? | 20:11 |
jjesse | don't rmemember but if you were a member of it you still should be | 20:11 |
LaserJock | bugsquad maybe? | 20:12 |
jjesse | sounds right | 20:12 |
LaserJock | I've got memberships in at least 7 different bug-related teams | 20:12 |
LaserJock | it's hard to keep them all straight ;-) | 20:12 |
LaserJock | oh wait | 20:13 |
secretlondon | i think qa became bugcontrol | 20:13 |
bdmurray | LaserJock: ubuntu-qa became bugcontrol | 20:13 |
LaserJock | yeah, that's what I was just gonna say | 20:13 |
LaserJock | because ~bugsquad was the lower team | 20:14 |
LaserJock | so does ~bugsquad have any permissions? | 20:14 |
bdmurray | I wouldn't say "lower" | 20:14 |
bdmurray | No, bugsquad doesn't. | 20:14 |
LaserJock | in a LP hierarchy it's lower | 20:15 |
LaserJock | but yeah, poor choice of words | 20:15 |
LaserJock | now what team does release nomination approval? | 20:16 |
bdmurray | LaserJock: I'm double checking | 20:18 |
LaserJock | my guess is ~ubuntu-dev | 20:18 |
bdmurray | I think it is ubuntu-drivers actually | 20:19 |
LaserJock | I dont' think so | 20:20 |
LaserJock | cause that would mean I couldn't do it | 20:20 |
bdmurray | Hmm, then the launchpad help about is misleading or the permissions are wrong | 20:21 |
LaserJock | and core-dev is a former member | 20:21 |
bdmurray | If you look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/209088/+nominate you'll see what I am talking about | 20:21 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 209088 in ubuntu "shuttle st20g5 not bootable in ubuntu 8.04 (not even console)" [Undecided,New] | 20:21 |
LaserJock | yeah, I think it's wrong | 20:24 |
LaserJock | I also checked on a Universe package just to see if it was component-specific | 20:25 |
LaserJock | at UDS-Sevilla we talked about having ~ubuntu-dev do it | 20:25 |
LaserJock | bdmurray: looks to be ~ubuntu-dev that has permissions on that | 20:35 |
afflux | does /proc/acpi/battery/BAT0/state necessarily have a "present rate:" line? | 20:35 |
=== tsmithe` is now known as tsmithe | ||
=== Pierre_ is now known as Pierre | ||
=== RAOF_ is now known as RAOF | ||
sbarjola | hi, I'm trying a backtrace for firefox-3 but gdb not found debug symbols | 22:36 |
sbarjola | I've installed the dbgsym packages | 22:36 |
sbarjola | need to config somothing else? | 22:38 |
=== erich is now known as erichj | ||
=== zirpu2 is now known as zirpu | ||
sbarjola | when I install firefox-3.0-dbgsym I found a binary in /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/firefox-3.0b4/ | 23:08 |
sbarjola | should run this with gdb for debug symbols ?, because bash cannot execute it | 23:09 |
crimsun | sbarjola: which -dbg packages? [The info at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Bugs may be outdated, but it provides the gist.] | 23:12 |
bdmurray | crimsun: did you see someone else had bug 208920? | 23:14 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 208920 in ubuntu "PCM volume too high after upgrade to Hardy" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/208920 | 23:14 |
sbarjola | firefox-3.0-dbgsym and firefox-3.0-gnome-support-dbgsym | 23:14 |
crimsun | bdmurray: no, but thanks for pointing it out. My e-mail time is extremely rationed these days. | 23:16 |
crimsun | sbarjola: you need quite a few additional -dbg packages. | 23:16 |
bdmurray | crimsun: I *think* it happened to me too. | 23:16 |
sbarjola | how can I know what additional packages need? | 23:19 |
crimsun | bdmurray: I briefly spoke with someone in +1 about writing a script to parse the state file (/var/lib/alsa/asound.state) parameters on dist-upgrade (well, really between different ALSA-driver versions). This is likely the culprit you guys are seeing - particularly if it's reproducible simply on dist-upgrade (from foo to hardy) in the cli with aplay or paplay | 23:19 |
crimsun | sbarjola: please see the web page I referenced above. Try a cli-only web browser as necessary. | 23:20 |
sbarjola | thanks | 23:21 |
bdmurray | crimsun: Is there anything I can do to help? | 23:21 |
crimsun | bdmurray: http://wiki.steenbe.nl/extra/alsachk (by osteenbergen); I don't know if that URL remains valid | 23:21 |
crimsun | bdmurray: post-first-boot asound.state for both kernels would be immensely helpful | 23:21 |
bdmurray | crimsun: A virtual machine would be fine correct? | 23:22 |
crimsun | bdmurray: as long as the audio card matches the host's, yes. | 23:23 |
mrooney | would someone mind looking at my response to bug 211550 and seeing if it is accurate and also letting me know if I should change the status on it | 23:50 |
ubotu | Launchpad bug 211550 in clive "[NEEDS-UPGRADING] Clive 0.4.3 to (currently) 0.4.8" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/211550 | 23:50 |
bdmurray | mrooney: I'm looking | 23:52 |
secretlondon | they haven't said which bugs it fixes, i think your response is fine | 23:53 |
bdmurray | mrooney: The status could be updated as we know it is true. | 23:54 |
secretlondon | that later version is in sid btw, just checked | 23:56 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!