[02:50] <emgent> morning
[12:44] <Iulian> Hey
[12:45] <steve555> Hi there.
[12:45] <Iulian> Hello steve
[12:45] <steve555> Hi Iulian
[12:46] <steve555> Where are you from?
[12:54] <steve555> I did have an annoying problem over the last few days.I'm running Kubuntu Hardy Heron,over the last week,after about an hour of booting into Kubuntu,the whole desktop used to completely freeze-up!it would take a few re-sets to get it going again.So I investigated inside my P.C suspecting it was my Graphics Card.I took my Graphics Card out of it's slot,blew as much dust as I could from it's fan,and made sure it was se
[12:54] <steve555> curely seated in it's AGP slot and started up again.So far my computer hasn't froze since :)
[12:58] <james_w> hi Iulian, congratulations on becoming a member.
[13:02] <Iulian> Hello james, thank you.
[13:02] <Iulian> Hey pedro
[13:02]  * Iulian - lunch!
[15:25] <bddebian> Boo
[15:26] <jpds> !gary
[15:26] <bddebian> :)
[15:43] <afflux> hi
[17:10] <jcastro> stgraber: I'm going to start posting to the brainstorm blog starting today
[17:11] <jcastro> stgraber: I figure one developer response every few days, since some are rather large
[17:12] <stgraber> jcastro: ok
[17:37] <tzd> I was wondering if it's possible to suggest a "fix" for the Firefox3 packet? I'm on kubuntu and i've noticed a few other kubuntu users have this issue: greyed out default application for extensions box in FF
[17:39] <tzd> the fix one guy suggested in a forum solved my issue and probably a lot of others as well. By installing the packet "firefox3-0-gnome-support" it worked like a charm. I was wondering if it's possible to have that automatically included when choosing to install the Firefox3 packet please?
[17:40] <Hewus> tzd: you can file bugs at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug , but check first that it hasn't already been reported
[17:40] <tzd> Hewus: ah ok, thanks!
[17:40] <Hewus> tzd: no worries, thank you for helping!
[17:41] <Hewus> bug #37272 documents an old bug fixed in gparted, but "new" in xfsprogs. I suspect the bug didn't apply to this package in the first place; is it safe to just mark it invalid, or should I still ask for info and mark it incomplete?
[17:41] <ubot3> Malone bug 37272 in gparted "gparted segfaults on access to XFS volume on LVM" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/37272
[17:42] <Hewus> whoa, bot fight
[17:44] <bdmurray> tzd: firefox-3.0-gnome-support is suggested by firefox-3.0.  How did you install?
[17:44] <tzd> bdmurray: i right clicked on Firefox-3.0 in adept and choose install... it only adds that packet
[17:45] <bdmurray> hmm, that might be a feature of adept
[17:45] <tzd> bdmurray: ah ok... so if i do it via apt-get i'll get the gnome support included?
[17:46] <bdmurray> tzd: no, you'd need to use aptitude, update-manager or maybe synaptic
[17:46] <bdmurray> mvo_: can you help here?
[17:47] <tzd> bdmurray: ok, although since it won't work with adept i should still file a bug report right?
[17:47] <bdmurray> tzd: I don't belive so not every package manager installs "Suggested" packages
[17:48] <mvo_> tzd: none of the package managers install suggests by default
[17:49] <\sh> that's what I thought right away when I saw this discussion..recommends yes (aptitude) but not suggests
[17:49] <mvo_> personally I think that firefox should depend on fierfox-3.0 and gnome-support and for people who do not want this, they should just install firefox-3.0
[17:49] <mvo_> but that is a decision of the package maintainer of ff
[17:49] <tzd> bdmurray: adept usually installs required packages... don't know if there's a difference in handling "required" or "suggested" but shouldn't this gnome support be included since it won't work properly without it? Or does it interfere in some other way perhaps?
[17:49] <mvo_> \sh: yep
[17:50] <\sh> if adept is installing suggests, it's a bug
[17:50] <mvo_> tzd: I'm pretty sure its only "suggests" because some people think they should be able to get ff without the gnome libs it pulls in
[17:51] <Hobbsee> bdmurray: suggests ahve never been installed by default...
[17:51] <Hobbsee> bdmurray: that being said, i don't think adept currently supports recommended packages being installed by default.
[17:51] <tzd> mvo_: hmm ok. Oh well, I'll leave it then.
[17:52] <bdmurray> mvo_: Is there a table somewhere of package managers and how they deal with recommended / suggested?
[17:52] <mvo_> tzd: just open a whishlist bug so that it becomes a recommends. we install those by default now in intrepid
[17:52] <mvo_> bdmurray: in intrepid it should be all consistent again "recommends-by-default" by everything, suggests by nothing
[17:52] <tzd> mvo_: ah ok. Can i do it here: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug#form-start ?
[17:53] <mvo_> bdmurray: in hardy it was "recommends-by-default: aptitude", "recommends-by-default for everything else only for packages in the section "metapackages"
[17:53] <\sh> bdmurray, if i'm  correct: aptitude == recommends by default, no suggests, apt-get == no recommends (for hardy and before), no suggests, for intrepid recommends by default
[17:53] <bdmurray> mvo_: okay, thanks
[17:53] <mvo_> tzd: that sounds right, please check if this bug is not reported already and please also add a bit of information what functionatlity is misisng without -gnome-support
[17:54] <tzd> mvo_: yeah will do. Haven't found any similar though
[17:54] <mvo_> bdmurray: it was a bit inconsistent in the past, mostly for historical reasons, but its all good now (I hope :)
[18:01] <jcastro> stgraber: If an ubuntu developer wants access so they can post under the developer comments I should send them to you guys?
[18:04] <stgraber> jcastro: yep
[18:04] <stgraber> (until we have Launchpad integration done)
[18:06] <jcastro> ok
[18:10] <tzd> mvo_: ok I've filled it out, although i can't see any alternative to change it to "wishlist" ?
[18:11] <tzd> shall i just add that to the title perhaps?
[18:15] <bdmurray> tzd: I can set it to wishlist for you what bug number is it?
[18:16] <tzd> bdmurray: cool, I'll just post it :)
[18:18] <tzd> bdmurray: #236850
[18:57] <amikrop> Hello. Any progress with the Change Keyboard Layout bug?
[18:57] <amikrop> I think it is quite serious.
[19:43] <mattik> Hello, my kubuntu-kde4 was cracked
[19:43] <mattik> and it wasupdated
[19:44] <hggdh> mattik: what do you mean by "was cracked"?
[19:44] <mattik> there is usename named in zenoss in /home-folder
[19:45] <hggdh> mattik: you mean you now have a new user in /home, and you did not create it?
[19:45] <mattik> I had hole in my firewall, but I hadn't installed ssh
[19:46] <mattik> it was in 22-port
[19:46] <mattik> Yes, I mean
[19:47] <mattik> You can scan my ports now. I'm in windows
[19:47] <hggdh> mattik: we will *not* scan you
[19:47] <mattik> ok
[19:48] <hggdh> mattik: what version of Ubuntu are you running?
[19:48] <mattik> Hardy, and kde4
[19:48] <hggdh> mattik: is this your personal computer?
[19:48] <mattik> yes it is
[19:49] <mattik> Inform I cert.fi?
[19:49] <hggdh> mattik: perhaps, if you can gather more data
[19:50] <mattik> hggdh, where can I paste screenshot on zenoss home-folder?
[19:51] <hggdh> mattik:  use pastebin services, for example http://pastebin.ca
[19:51] <mattik> thank you
[19:51] <hggdh> and then post the URL
[19:54] <hggdh> mattik: did you install zenoss packages (http://www.zenoss.com)
[19:54] <mattik> oh yes
[19:54] <mattik> sorry
[19:55] <mattik> I wondered how I have heared it :D I'm really sorry
[19:56] <mattik> That's good to hear
[19:56] <mattik> I didn't become cracked
[19:57] <afflux> mattik: in general, you can't get cracked by just having a port "not blocked" in any firewall, unless you really have a service running on it.
[19:58] <mattik> ok, but I don't trust browsers
[19:58] <hggdh> mattik: probably not... but it is a good lesson to keep in mind
[19:58] <mattik> ok, thanks
[19:59] <hggdh> mattik: you need code running on your computer to be owned.
[19:59] <mattik> ok, thanks. This is good to hear
[20:00] <mattik> So I don't need firewall on kubuntu
[20:01] <hggdh> mattik: you should have a firewall, and a paranoid view
[20:02] <mattik> hggdh: what is firewall for kubuntu? Is it firestarter?
[20:02] <mattik> I have router's firewall
[20:09] <mattik> thank you :) I'm glad that you don't laugh me out
[20:48] <jcastro> stgraber: what do you think about a "wontfix"-style resolution for brainstorm?
[20:48] <jcastro> something like "thanks but the idea, but this won't be implemented."
[20:50] <stgraber> jcastro: indeed, I'm not 100% sure of the point of having "Inaplicable" as for me it'd then be wontfix, deleted or not an idea
[20:50] <stgraber> jcastro: btw, you should join #ubuntu-testing so you can also speak with Nicolas
[20:50] <hggdh> jcastro: just out of curiosity -- an explanation of why it "won't be fixed" will be provided, right?
[20:51] <jcastro> hggdh: well yes, of course.
[20:51] <stgraber> hggdh: a developer comment would be added then yes
[20:51] <hggdh> good idea, then
[21:41] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/235889 somebody check plz :)
[21:41] <ubot3> Malone bug 235889 in linux "BUG: scheduling while atomic: archhttp64/7146/0x1000000001" [Undecided,New]
[21:42] <jpds> hmm, two bots
[21:42] <dupondje> seems so :P
[21:44] <dupondje> anyway ? can check ?
[21:44] <dupondje> :)
[21:47] <ogasawara> dupondje: I'll take a look
[21:47] <dupondje> thx ogasawara :)
[21:48] <ogasawara> dupondje: I think the kernel team recently rebased the Intrepid kernel with 2.6.24-rc4
[21:48] <ogasawara> dupondje: so I may have you test when it's available
[21:48] <dupondje> but then I have to upgrade to Intrepid ?
[21:48] <ogasawara> dupondje: not really, I've got instructions for testing from the kernel-ppa
[21:49] <dupondje> isn't it possible to patch it in the Hardy kernel ?
[21:49] <ogasawara> dupondje: if we can narrow down the exact patch
[21:49] <dupondje> I can try some patches ...
[21:50] <dupondje> from diffs of the 2 kernels ...
[21:50] <ogasawara> dupondje: do you have an idea which patches to test?
[21:50] <dupondje> but what file would be important ? :)
[21:50] <ogasawara> dupondje: might be easier doing a git bisect
[21:50] <ogasawara> dupondje: if you're familiar with performing one
[21:51] <dupondje> I tried to patch the scheduler with the 2.6.26-rc4 diff :p
[21:51] <dupondje> but didn't fix it
[21:53] <dupondje> the BUG message is printed from scheduler.c right ?
[21:53] <dupondje> but what triggers it ? :)
[21:54] <ogasawara> dupondje: I'll post some info to the report just in case others running into the same bug might benefit
[21:54] <dupondje> okie :D
[21:54] <dupondje> will try it this weekend ... cause the pc is not here :)
[21:54] <ogasawara> dupondje: ok thanks
[21:55] <dupondje> I need to thank you :)
[22:02] <ogasawara> dupondje: just curious when you tested the upstream 2.6.26-rc4 kernel did you use an ubuntu kernel config to build the kernel?
[22:03] <dupondje> yes
[22:03] <dupondje> just copyed it ;)
[22:03] <ogasawara> dupondje: great thanks
[22:03] <dupondje> and made a .deb from it
[22:03] <dupondje> with make-kpkg ?
[22:03] <dupondje> :)
[22:10] <emgent> heya
[22:28]  * dupondje reads
[22:28] <dupondje> :P
[22:34] <dupondje> thx for instructions
[22:35] <dupondje> i'll try this weekend ...