[00:12] <windmill> cool, It's done, the apport-cli tool is really very easy to use
[03:32] <Awsoonn> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/237284 what package
[07:39] <kdiggdy> hello?
[09:18] <dupondje> hi ogasawara :)
[16:10] <thekorn> bdmurray, hi, I would like to comment on the bug-metrics blueprint. what's the prefered way: commenting in the whiteboard section in lp or in the comment section of the wiki page?
[16:14] <bdmurray> thekorn: the discussion section of the wiki page
[16:15] <thekorn> ok
[16:15] <ogasawara> dupondje: hi - one of the kernel guys is now working on your bug which has to go through the SRU process
[16:15] <Nightrose> bdmurray: hi :)    would you be so kind to extend my membership in the bugsquad team? it is about to expire
[16:17] <bdmurray> Nightrose: done!
[16:17] <Nightrose> bdmurray: thanks :)
[16:39] <zul> mvo: can I take care of your uucp merge?
[16:42] <mvo> zul: too late, I just filed a sync request for it
[16:42] <mvo> (~15min ago)
[16:43] <mvo> zul: but if you feel there is something to merge, just go ahead and close the sync request
[16:43]  * mvo has no idea why he ended up with uucp anyway :)
[16:43] <zul> mvo: heh
[16:44] <mvo> bug 238576 (just FYI)
[16:45] <zul> mvo: gotcha
[17:24] <bddebian> Boo
[17:37] <mrooney> bdmurray: ping
[17:41] <mrooney> wow sudo is maxing out my CPU, that's neat
[17:42] <bdmurray> mrooney: pong
[17:42] <mrooney> bdmurray: I was just wondering if you were aware that the workflow script will add the header text more than once if multiple subscribers match (bug #192945)
[17:43] <mrooney> I fixed it by adding a break; in the 'if', but I wasn't sure if that was intentional since you have them as separate strings
[17:46] <bdmurray> mrooney: there is an updated version of the script
[17:46] <mrooney> bdmurray: ahh okay, sorry, where might I find it?
[17:47] <bdmurray> mrooney: I just copied it to http://people.ubuntu.com/~brian/greasemonkey/lp_workflowreports.user.js
[17:50] <mrooney> bdmurray: thanks!
[17:50] <mrooney> is anyone aware of this sudo cpu bug? I just saw a 'fix' today I thought come in, in -updates
[17:51] <mrooney> I have no idea how to get rid of the process, other than restarting
[17:52] <mrooney> I shall restart now
[19:11] <qense> ping bdmurray
[20:10] <jdstrand> bdmurray: hi!
[20:11] <jdstrand> bdmurray: I used to use in some scripts:
[20:11] <jdstrand> if not 'ubuntu-bugs' in bug.subscriptions:
[20:11] <jdstrand>     bug.subscribers.add("ubuntu-bugs")
[20:11] <bdmurray> it's fixed in bzr and in -proposed
[20:11] <jdstrand> bdmurray: ah
[20:12] <jdstrand> bdmurray: that is what package, python-launchpad-bugs?
[20:12] <bdmurray> jdstrand: that's right and comment on the bug if it works for you. ;)
[20:13] <jdstrand> bdmurray: when was it pushed to -proposed, today?
[20:13] <jdstrand> bdmurray: ah yes, it was
[20:13] <jdstrand> oh no, it was into -updates as of today
[20:18] <jdstrand> bdmurray: fixed it, and commented-- thanks!
[21:16] <afflux> hi
[21:24] <bdmurray> afflux: hi!
[21:26] <afflux> bddebian: hi! I like your idea of everyone in bugcontrol being able to review applications, by the way :)
[21:26] <afflux> bd<tab>: bdmurray ^
[21:36] <PsySine> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay needs some update I think
[21:38] <bdmurray> PsySine: fixed, thanks!
[21:38] <PsySine> is there a bug day once a week or so?
[21:39] <bdmurray> PsySine: every Tuesday and Thursday for the most part
[21:39] <PsySine> oh ok
[22:09] <mrooney> is there a certain process that is good to go through for creating a blueprint in ubuntu?
[22:11] <mrooney> (and/or, is there a better channel for discussing such matters)
[22:12] <james_w> mrooney: what's your blueprint about?
[22:13] <mrooney> james_w: well Ubuntu now has a nice system in place to install available drivers when you plug them in
[22:14] <mrooney> and there are lots of packages in the ubuntu repos for drivers
[22:14] <mrooney> but there isn't a linkage between the two that I am aware
[22:14] <danbhfive> what about the restricted-drivers manager?
[22:15] <mrooney> it would be nice for it to be aware of what drivers are out there, so it can download the driver, otherwise it can require a fair amount of knowledge
[22:15] <mrooney> danbhfive: well, that could work but a) the drivers aren't necessarily restricted b) how does the user know to use that
[22:16] <danbhfive> you know, I don't even know how drivers are installed.  I thought it was all automatic
[22:16] <james_w> restricted-manager is now called jockey, which is the system that installs drivers
[22:17] <james_w> it detects hardware that it knows something about, and installs the driver if you don't have it.
[22:18] <mrooney> should it work for printers? maybe mine was an isolated case
[22:18] <james_w> mrooney: are you referring to all the -source packages in the archive?
[22:18] <james_w> mrooney: no, it doesn't work for printers, but I believe that is planned for 8.10
[22:18] <danbhfive> mrooney: I thought gutsy was supposed to have it work for printers, but it still doesnt work well
[22:19] <mrooney> I had to search on the internet for using a Brother 240C in Ubuntu and found brother-cups-wrapper-[bh7|extra]
[22:20] <mrooney> I installed those and then could select the driver from the 'Printing' dialog in Administration
[22:20] <james_w> mrooney: pitti is the person that knows all about this, if it is about printers then tkamppeter will be involved.
[22:20] <james_w> I know they are working on something, let me see if I can dig up some more information.
[22:21] <mrooney> it just would have been wonderful if instead of installing it in text-only mode, it had known about and offered to install those packages
[22:21] <james_w> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/jockey-printer-driver-support
[22:21] <james_w> https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/printerdriverautodownload
[22:22] <mrooney> ahhh, what is the "edge" aspect
[22:22] <mrooney> I searched blueprints for 'print' but those didn't turn up
[22:22] <mrooney> thanks james_w, those look like exactly what I want!
[22:23] <james_w> edge is the testing server for launchpad, it uses the same data.
[22:23] <james_w> I searched for "jockey", and they were the two results.
[22:25] <Hammerhead> anyone seen this "This utility only unmounts cifs filesystems."
[22:25] <Hammerhead> umounting a samba share
[22:26] <james_w> Hammerhead: using what tool?
[22:26] <Hammerhead> I know about  bug# 461048 but there is no answer or workaround
[22:26] <Hammerhead> umount
[22:26] <Hammerhead> umount <share name>
[22:26] <Hammerhead> It mounts fine
[22:27] <Hammerhead> Only way to remove the share is to reboot
[22:27] <Hammerhead> mtab lists the share
[22:28] <Hammerhead> df does not
[22:28] <Hammerhead> running 8.04
[22:28] <Hammerhead> thought upgrading was a good idea.....WRONG!!
[22:29] <Hammerhead> No audio
[22:29] <Hammerhead> No modem
[22:29] <Hammerhead> and now this
[22:30] <Hammerhead> ;-)
[22:33] <james_w> Hammerhead: it sounds like the bug report you gave is exactly your problem?
[22:37] <Hammerhead> james_w The bug report is from January though........
[22:54] <xnox> is anyone here? or do I have internet problems
[22:56] <danbhfive> xnox: i read you
[22:56] <xnox> Oh good. Thanks
[22:56] <xnox> Why is everyone so quite?
[22:57] <xnox> or am I supposed to be hard preparing for the Hug day =D
[23:01] <greg-g> prep hard, train hard, triage hard!
[23:01] <bdmurray> greg-g: heh
[23:02] <greg-g> reminder: bug jam tonight in Michigan at 6:30 Eastern (30 minutes from now)
[23:08] <xnox> greg-g: Well it will be first time for me =D got to reboot into ubuntu =D
[23:13] <mrooney> am I missing something with bug #209999, it is Invalid but has 8 dups?
[23:15] <Old_Soldier> lol private duplicated invalid bug :)
[23:15]  * Old_Soldier whistles and walks away like nothing happened :)
[23:17] <bdmurray> mrooney: did you look for the bug pedro says it is a duplicate of?
[23:23] <mrooney> bdmurray: no, I went to check back on it and I see that IT has duplicate bugs
[23:23] <mrooney> probably a good thing to do
[23:24] <mrooney> what do you think of tagging bugs like that also with 'likely-dup', so we can search for Invalid+'likely-dup' to find bugs which are known dups but not identified yet
[23:24] <mrooney> those could be a good candidate for a Hug Day
[23:25] <bdmurray> I'd rather not spend time looking at bugs like that one.
[23:26] <mrooney> haha, I have no idea if that is a serious comment or not
[23:26] <bdmurray> mrooney: it's probably a dupe of bug 216244
[23:27] <bdmurray> Seriously! ;) We have lots of other more fruitful ways we could be looking at bug reports.
[23:29] <mrooney> interesting, that bug was filed after 209999
[23:30] <mrooney> though I wouldn't, I don't think, want to mark a non-private bug a dup of a private bug, that would hide them all, or at least the master, which seems unproductive
[23:30] <bdmurray> the new bug, 216244, is more complete in that it has an upstream bug watch
[23:33] <mrooney> indeed, that does seem better
[23:34] <mrooney> although it means if pedro is correct that there is still another floating around
[23:35] <bdmurray> hmm?
[23:35] <mrooney> well pedro said in 209999 on 4-01-08 that it was already reported but didn't know which bug it was, but 216244 was filed on 4-12-08, so that can't be the bug he was referring to
[23:36] <mrooney> meaning the bug he was referring to is still "out there"
[23:36] <bdmurray> ah, that makes sense
[23:40] <mrooney> bdmurray: by the way, what is the proper thing to do in a couple weeks when my BugControl membership expires? just ping you?
[23:41] <bdmurray> mrooney: right, ping me before it expires
[23:41] <mrooney> great, is it bad if it is after it expires. I don't really know how to find exactly when I was approved
[23:42] <bdmurray> mrooney: no, not really you'll be warned well before it expires anyway
[23:43] <mrooney> oh okay, that shall do, thanks!