[00:19] <mrooney> huh. does anyone know why doing a fresh install of 8.04.1 on a macbook doesn't allow it to boot? it just goes to a white screen and flashes a question mark
[00:19] <mrooney> I would have thought grub would take care of everything
[00:24] <sn9> mrooney: did you use bootcamp?
[00:35] <mrooney> sn9: nope, just booted from the CD, deleted all the partitions, and made new ones
[00:35] <mrooney> from the hardy cd that is
[00:35] <sn9> mrooney: that's why
[00:36] <mrooney> I think it is bug 222126
[00:36] <sn9> EFI needs an EFI partition
[00:36] <sn9> you have to use bootcamp to create it, AIUI
[00:38] <Flannel> mrooney: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/MacBookPro
[00:39] <mrooney> Flannel: any particular section?
[00:40] <mrooney> I don't see a section on just "installing ubuntu"
[00:53] <mrooney> wow this is really hard!
[00:54] <mrooney> every single guide I can find is dual or triple booting
[00:54] <mrooney> I just want ubuntu!
[00:54] <sn9> if you can't figure out how to do that from the guides yourself, get someone else to install it for you
[00:55] <Flannel> mrooney: http://wiki.debian.org/MacBook#head-95cace70d21bfdc171ab9030459c118bfd999450
[00:55] <Flannel> mrooney: Debian vs Ubuntu vs arbitrary other linux doesn't matter.
[00:56] <Flannel> basically, you install like normal. And the boot stuff does BIOS compatability, and everyone is happy
[00:57] <mrooney> Flannel: ah okay, just I just do that and reinstall?
[00:58] <Flannel> mrooney: Yep
[01:05] <mrooney> Flannel: thanks! let us see how this works
[01:06] <mrooney> oh boy, new partition table, looks promising!
[01:14] <mrooney> what a nasty bug
[01:14] <mrooney> though I am really glad to see an improved Wubi in 8.04.1
[01:14] <sn9> it's not like wubi can get any worse
[01:14] <mrooney> :)
[01:15] <mrooney> it worked alright except it messed up the menu.lst so it couldn't boot
[01:15] <mrooney> also it broke windows from booting
[01:15] <mrooney> but I looked it up online and it was a known issue and just involved changing the menu.lst I think, anyone the new version worked like a charm on the same machine
[01:16] <mrooney> sn9: you aren't impressed with Wubi?
[01:16] <sn9> it sounds much more impressive than it is
[01:16] <mrooney> well, what it does for ease of installation and trying for windows users is impressive, I think
[01:17] <savvas> it prevents people from loading the live cd, and asking how to do stuff like booting from a live cd :)
[01:17] <mrooney> it takes a whole bunch of overwhelming steps (to 98% of the population) and throws them out the window
[01:17] <mrooney> haha
[01:17] <savvas> seriously, there's a whole bunch of them at ubuntuforums
[01:17] <sn9> they could have easily made it work with fat filesystems
[01:18] <mrooney> it only works on ntfs?
[01:18] <sn9> yep
[01:18] <savvas> well it's a good marketing idea to steal users :p
[01:19] <mrooney> Flannel: it's booting, hooray! thanks a thousand
[01:19] <mrooney> savvas: yeah, it makes it trivial to give to my parents and say "here, try this"
[01:20] <mrooney> I think it will allow users of ubuntu to get others to try it out much easier
[01:20] <savvas> haha, then after five minutes.. "where's my screen!!!"
[01:20] <sn9> it's less trivial to get your parents to like it
[01:20] <mrooney> haha
[01:20] <mrooney> all fair points I guess
[01:20] <savvas> my dad and I learned together dos from a book in greek
[01:21] <savvas> that's how i got attached to computers as my hobby heh
[01:21] <sn9> i wish i had the chance to show ubuntu to my dad, but it didn't exist during his lifetime
[01:43] <tritium> sn9: I do too
[02:20] <sn9> any release managers around?
[02:48] <Hobbsee> sn9: yes, why?
[02:49] <sn9> sru been sitting around a couple of days...
[02:49] <sn9> #246834
[02:50] <Hobbsee> bug 246834
[02:54] <LaserJock> sn9: man, you sure are persistent :-)
[02:54] <sn9> LaserJock: yep
[02:55] <sn9> it's how things get done
[02:55] <LaserJock> somewhat, a balance is good
[02:56] <LaserJock> somewhere between bringing it to people's attention and nagging them to death :-)
[02:56] <sn9> persistence balances neglect, so it's all good
[02:57]  * Hobbsee isn't touching sru's, anyway
[02:58] <LaserJock> if it's been uploaded the archive admins will get to it when they can
[02:58] <sn9> how big is the backlog?
[03:00] <LaserJock> sn9: here is the hardy queue: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=
[03:00] <LaserJock> that's certainly not all they have to do
[03:00] <Hobbsee> sn9: besides, if you hadn't noticed, people have been trying to get the next alpha of intrepid out, so sru's may fall down the totem pole.
[03:01] <sn9> well, at least it'll be in the alpha...
[03:02] <sn9> LaserJock: thanx!!
[03:09] <Hobbsee> wow, that was only filed on wednesday
[03:10] <sn9> and it's already dead-center in the queue
[03:13] <Hobbsee> sn9: fyi, as a general piece of advice, if you get a reputation as being very persistent, no matter how important whatever you want to be done is, people are likely to deprioritise your stuff, out of principle.
[03:13] <Hobbsee> various people have found this.
[03:14]  * sn9 grumbles
[03:16] <LaserJock> Hobbsee: well, there is a difference between persistent and annoyingly persistent
[03:16] <LaserJock> it's just that that line isn't always clear at the beginning
[03:17] <Hobbsee> ah, yes, that's what i meant.
[03:17] <LaserJock> sn9: from our perspective we see some SRUs taking more than a month often times
[03:18] <LaserJock> sn9: so going from filed to in -proposed in 3 days is actually rather fast
[03:18] <Hobbsee> and i'd also suggest that people actually test the prereleases, so people find such bugs quicker.
[03:18] <sn9> an sru for samba i could expect to last a year, but this one is tiny
[03:19] <LaserJock> well, that might be true, but we've had "tiny" ones cause pretty bad problems before
[03:20] <sn9> that wouldn't be possible with this one -- it doesn't even affect any code, just data
[03:21] <LaserJock> ... and it's getting processed very quickly
[03:22] <sn9> i'll be considerably less persistent with bug 246850 if it qualifies for an sru
[03:22] <Hobbsee> no you won't.
[03:22] <Hobbsee> you'll find another bug to be persistant about.
[03:22] <LaserJock> Hobbsee: now now ;-)
[03:22] <sn9> not to this degree
[03:23] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: true.  but it's obvious :)
[03:23]  * RAOF goes to ammend that bug.  It's title is really misleading.
[03:35] <Hobbsee> !sru
[03:35] <sn9> that i read
[03:38] <Hobbsee> i was reading it.
[06:01] <pwnguin> should I be concerned that the gedit spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "ubuntu"?
[06:02] <sn9> i wondered that myself
[06:03] <sn9> meh, ultimately yet another manifestation of bug 1
[08:58] <Awsoonn> oh mighty #ubuntu-bugs: Bug #231732 -> 'triaged' please
[09:03] <thekorn> oh mighty Awsoonn: done :)
[09:03]  * Awsoonn grabs the butter
[09:03] <Awsoonn> thanks thekorn
[09:04] <Awsoonn> thekorn, does it usually take long to be approved / denied for bug control?
[09:06] <thekorn> Awsoonn, it depends on the workload of the involved people,
[09:06] <thekorn> it is now release/testing time and some conferences,
[09:06] <thekorn> so it might take some time
[09:06] <thekorn> but usualy within weeks and not years :)
[09:07] <Awsoonn> very cool
[10:14] <afflux> morning
[10:54] <bliZZardz> What can be statuses for Breezy bugs? ;)
[11:16] <gnomefreak> jpds: you really dont want to unban AMarigot-102-1
[11:17] <gnomefreak> you are just askiung for problems if you do
[11:17] <jpds> gnomefreak: Couldn't find him/her/it in the bantracker.
[11:18] <gnomefreak> jpds: dont go by bantracker as it has been having problems sicne new bot was active
[11:18] <gnomefreak> around the time seveas left and took ubotu
[11:20] <jpds> gnomefreak: Well, if it goes that far back, I doubt they'll come back soon. :)
[11:22] <gnomefreak> jpds: i hope not he was really really bad <trolling> every #ubuntu-* channel. trolling for lack of a better word
[11:58] <Hobbsee> bliZZardz: invalid, if they don't occur in later releases
[13:36] <savvas> can someone paste the output of: ls -l /usr/share/python-apt/templates/Ubuntu.info
[13:36] <Hobbsee> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10684 2008-07-04 02:20 /usr/share/python-apt/templates/Ubuntu.info
[13:37] <thekorn> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10684 2008-07-03 18:25 /usr/share/python-apt/templates/Ubuntu.info
[13:37] <savvas> thanks
[13:37] <savvas> I wonder why they can't replace the file
[13:38] <savvas> (bug 244093)
[13:43] <james_w> they were probably just not root
[13:48] <savvas> mm true
[13:49] <savvas> cool, I have a greyed out firefox that works!
[16:02] <Ienorand> Hello, could somebody lend me a hand in triaging bug #242196, I'm suspecting erroneous drivers, any comments? (and yes, I've not done much triaging before)
[16:14] <ogra> Ienorand, request dmesg info as well ... since udev doesnt seem to see it its likely a kernel issue
[16:32] <sn9> ogra, Ienorand: upon reading the bug, it's clear that the kernel does see a device
[16:33] <sn9> i have a sneaking suspicion that the device simply isn't in storage mode
[16:36] <Ienorand> Well, the phone thinks it is connected, thus I thought the error would not lie on that half.
[16:36] <sn9> oh, i misread
[16:39] <Ienorand> but it may be that the phone won't connect properly without its software suite.... by the way, how do you see that the kernel sees a device?
[16:40] <sn9> i misread "the phone will register that it is plugged into the computer" as "the phone will register when it is plugged into the computer"
[16:42] <Ienorand> ah, right.
[17:12] <bliZZardz> w.r.t bug 247916 : how do we ensure that dependant pkgs are always packages together. I stumbled on the same problem reported in this bug.
[18:25] <sn9> wow, bug 75611 is hilarious! "Where's the F0 key?"
[18:26] <bliZZardz> sn9 : lol
[18:26] <sn9> i can't stop laughing
[18:28] <sn9> or rather, its duplicate, bug 222269
[18:46] <sumitc> !ubuntulog
[18:46] <sumitc> !ubottu
[19:45] <chrisccoulson> hi, would somebody kindly set the status for the linux-source-2.6.17 task in this report to 'wont fix' please? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/69046
[19:50] <sn9> it's not showing Won't Fix as an option
[19:51] <chrisccoulson> you need to be a member of ubuntu bug control to set that status;)
[19:51] <sn9> ah
[20:04] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, let me have a look at it
[20:05] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, wont fix would not be the correct status, would it?
[20:05] <chrisccoulson> it would be the correct status for the linux-source-2.6.17 task, as support for Edgy has expired
[20:06] <chrisccoulson> as the guy claims the issue is fixed in later releases, I added a linux task and set it to fixed
[20:06] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, OK
[20:06] <hggdh> done
[20:07] <hggdh> I added a blurb explaining why
[20:08] <chrisccoulson> thanks for that. much appreciated"!
[20:10] <hggdh> welcome
[22:09] <mad_goldfish> Can I volunteer to help test #245122? What do I have to do?
[22:24] <charlie-tca> bug 245122
[22:31] <charlie-tca> You have to downgrade your version of the upgrades, then attempt the upgrade thru upgrade manager or
[22:31] <charlie-tca> using apt-get update
[22:32] <charlie-tca> This only applies if you use the apps mentioned in the bug report
[22:32] <mad_goldfish> I haven't applied the fix yet, so I'm still getting the error, but I'm guessing the main repo hasn't had the fix applied yet
[22:34] <charlie-tca> That sounds right. did you test using https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed ?
[22:38] <mad_goldfish> Ah, that sounds like the link I've been looking for. I'll check it out and see it helps. Thanks
[22:39] <charlie-tca> No problem. Good luck and thanks for testing
[22:41] <mad_goldfish> I thought it was about time I gave some hours back to Ubuntu for all the time it's saved me :-) And it makes a change from programming other projects :-)
[22:43] <charlie-tca> :0
[22:43] <charlie-tca> :)
[23:33] <mad_goldfish> I think I've got it setup to test buut it turns out there's been a lot happening on the repos recently so still waiting on apt-get to finish that...
[23:34] <mad_goldfish> If I understand bug 245122 correctly, the fix is just in the package, so a successful install is a confirmed fix, correct?
[23:38] <crimsun> mad_goldfish: if you upgrade from hardy-updates's version to hardy-proposed's version successfully, yes, that can be considered confirmation of the fix
[23:39] <LimCore> hello fellow devels
[23:39] <LimCore> another day, another failures of ubuntu.
[23:40] <LimCore> how to report general problems like  "network stops working"  or  "slow video playback (all players, xorg and xgl etc"  ?
[23:40] <crimsun> mad_goldfish: so, for nss, we're considering 1.9-0ubuntu0.8.04.1 -> 3.12.0.3-0ubuntu0.8.04.2, and for nspr, 4.7.1+1.9-0ubuntu0.8.04.1 -> 4.7.1+1.9-0ubuntu0.8.04.3
[23:40] <crimsun> err
[23:41] <crimsun> nss: 3.12.0.2+1.9-0ubuntu0.8.04.1 -> 3.12.0.3-0ubuntu0.8.04.2
[23:41] <crimsun> LimCore: you can just file them under Ubuntu, but those symptoms are much too vague to be useful.
[23:42] <LimCore> well someone should fix it, unless we want ubuntu to remain a failure
[23:43] <LimCore> is there some program like this? i.e. developer concentrates on given bug untill it is fixed?
[23:43] <crimsun> LimCore: sure, purchase support from Canonical
[23:44] <crimsun> or a vetted reseller of support, I suppose
[23:44] <LimCore> then some real developer will concentrate on solving given ubuntu bug?
[23:44] <crimsun> with respect to the symptoms that you mentioned, you can help by being more precise.
[23:44] <LimCore> (not just some support intern)
[23:44] <LimCore> sure I will
[23:44] <LimCore> but will they fix it then
[23:45] <crimsun> you'll need to contact Canonical in that regard.
[23:45] <LimCore> good idea
[23:45] <crimsun> I am not a Canonical employee, and I do not intend to misstate their policies.
[23:52] <mad_goldfish> Hmm.. That's odd, and slightly worrying, Aptitude wants to uninstall debhelper, samba, gcc and others. I'll have to fix that before I can test the bug.
[23:54] <charlie-tca> mad_goldfish: You didn't remove any repositories, did you?
[23:55] <mad_goldfish> No. proposed was already in my repo list so I didn't have to change anything. I think it might be a hangover from a previous install. I'll set them to ignore for now
[23:58] <mad_goldfish> charlie-tca, unless the /etc/apt/preferences file broke something
[23:58] <mad_goldfish> :-( Install from proposed didn't work. Same error. I'll post t to the bug
[23:59] <charlie-tca> orry to hear that.
[23:59] <charlie-tca> But, each tester helps, I think.