[01:20] <james_w> does anyone know where bug 258676 should go?
[01:20] <james_w> are language packs used for d-i?
[01:24] <Hobbsee> i've been assigning them to the relevant loco team
[01:24] <Hobbsee> or translator team
[02:44] <Hew> mouz: Thanks for helping with bug #120199
[03:09] <Hew> If firefox crashes (reproducible), but does not trigger apport, what should the next step be for triaging the issue?
[03:09] <Hew> backtrace?
[03:20] <persia> Hew: Is apport enabled?  There really oughtn't be a crash that doesn't trigger apport.
[03:20] <Hew> persia: The user says yes. bug #219555
[03:21] <gauthierm> trackerd is taking all my available CPU and I can't figure out a.) why it's doing it and b.) how to turn it off.
[03:21] <Hew> persia: I have also had nspluginwrapper take firefox down with it without triggering apport before
[03:21] <gauthierm> It indexed everything successfully two days ago but today started running all the time.
[03:22] <Hew> gauthierm: This channel is for the triaging of bugs. You can find user support in #ubuntu, or you can report a bug on your issue.
[03:23] <gauthierm> Hew: thanks
[03:23] <persia> Hew: Hmm.  I'm not sure then.  it's especially tricky because you can't replicate.
[03:24] <Hew> persia: I can replicate my nspluginwrapper issue (which is a big high priority bug somewhere), so I can confirm that apport sometimes doesn't catch crashes.
[03:24] <persia> A backtrace can help understand the issue, but if apport isn't seeing a crash, I wonder if either 1) there is a mechanism in the app to just shut down cleanly in a hurry rather than crashes, or 2) it is specifically filtered out in apport.  In the latter case, I wouldn't be sure a hand-generatd backtrace would help.
[03:24] <Hew> persia: I was thinking perhaps it's a signal that apport doesn't catch (I don't know much about these things)
[03:26] <Hew> persia: Simple terminal output was useful for me with my issue, perhaps I'll ask for that.
[03:26] <persia> I think apport is support catching any program that dies with a signal, but that doesn't mean the program doesn't have it's own exception handler to quit cleanly (but excitedly) in the case of an error.
[03:26] <persia> Yeah, that sounds like a goor first thing to try.
[03:28] <Hew> persia: ah ok. Thanks for your help :-)
[03:43] <Rocket2DMn> this is a test - bug 258700
[07:48] <Initial_M> my system is crashing after cliking on minimize on OPERA/FIREFOX
[07:49] <Polo> Hi, I got a problem : debuild don't work on my package : dpkg-checkbuilddeps won't find libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-dev even if the package exists
[07:50] <Hobbsee> Polo: where are you building this?
[07:50] <Hew> Initial_M:  This channel is for the triaging of bugs. You can find user support in #ubuntu, or you can report a bug on your issue.
[07:53] <Polo> I want to make a package, it used to built but now it just won't
[07:53] <Polo> because dpkg-checkbuilddeps cant find libgstreamer-plugins-base0.10-dev
[07:54] <Polo> I got the same problem with other packages and other builddeps
[07:54]  * Hobbsee suspects user error.
[07:55] <Hobbsee> like, not having main enabled, or something.
[07:58] <Polo> Is there something to update besides pbuilder ?
[07:58] <Hobbsee> no
[13:37] <wolfger> need somebody from bug control to mark Bug 68087 as "won't fix"
[13:46]  * LimCore is always amazed.. how hard is it to write a program without bunch of strange bugs
[13:47] <Nafallo> very, very, very, VERY hard.
[13:47] <Nafallo> ;)
[14:22] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/audacious/+bug/258797
[14:22] <dupondje> plz :)
[16:19] <mcas> hello everyone
[16:20] <Alan_M> hello mcas
[19:07] <Ampelbein> Could a member of bug-control please check on bug #179728? i think it could be set to "triaged".
[19:12] <Alan_M> have you looked through the page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage and https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HelpingWithBugs  and applied the requirements to the bug in question?
[19:16] <Ampelbein> hm... i think every needed information is there. is there something special you want to tell me i should have a look at?
[19:19] <Alan_M> actually..because of the comment on how to fix it, it MIGHT be able to get "fix committed" status.....im not sure....ive only really been on the team a little while now.
[19:21] <Ampelbein> If i'm getting the Bugs/Status-Page right: #Fix Committed is not to be used when a patch is attached to a bug
[19:21] <Ampelbein> so this should only be used if the patch/solution will be in one of the next releases.
[19:21] <Ampelbein> but i might be wrong.
[19:26] <chrisccoulson> Ampelbein - you are correct. Fix Committed should not be used when a patch is attached to the report.
[19:31] <Alan_M> ah
[19:32]  * Alan_M said i wasnt sure so i get no smack on wrist right? :P
[20:20] <sysdoc> Does anyone know what the package for the FFX 3.0 Java plugin is called?
[20:20] <pwnguin> gcj-java-plugin?
[20:22] <sysdoc> Synaptic isn't showing it
[20:22] <pwnguin> its something like that. im at "work" right now =/
[20:23] <sysdoc> I installed the plugin that was in the repos but appearently it doesn't like FFX 3.0
[20:26]  * pheeror has problems with javaws in intrepid
[20:26] <pheeror> apparently openjdk jnlp implemention has fundamental problems
[21:35] <dupondje> pheeror: its ALPHA !
[22:13] <mrooney> Does anyone else think the stock Incomplete response is a little harsh sounding?
[22:14] <mrooney> particularly, "Unfortunately we can't fix it", I think should become "Unfortunately we can't fix it in its current state,"
[22:15] <mrooney> I think the current wording can tend to imply to new users that it "can't be fixed"
[22:23] <mcas> mrooney: i think your version sounds better
[22:44] <Ampelbein> i have a question regarding bugs which are still in the status "new" without any response from anybody. I started to address those bugs with the "old untouched bugs"-response and have now received some complaints of why noone addressed that earlier. i replied that it is because of the huge amount of bugs filed. so far, everything ok. my question now is if this is a good way to treat these old bugs or if i should just leave them untouched?
[22:44] <Ampelbein> i'm talking of bugs filed long (>1yr) ago...
[23:08] <chrisccoulson> Ampelbein, you should definately still look at old bug reports, as it is necessary to find out if that particular old bug is still a problem. Just ensure that you remain cool and polite even if you are being harassed by the reporter of an old bug. Remember, if a bug reporter is abusive towards you at all, you should point them towards the Code of Conduct.
[23:09] <chrisccoulson> http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct/
[23:09] <Ampelbein> chrisccoulson: no problem with staying cool and polite, my day job is in it-support ;-) thanks for the info.
[23:19] <RAOF> Ampelbein: That said, it's important to read the bug before touching it, even if its old.  Particularly: some bugs will have a well-described method of reproduction.  You should certainly try it yourself before touching the bug.
[23:21] <Ampelbein> i do that when i see that its a problem i can reproduce fairly fast, but not when i have to install additional software which i probably won't even understand. ;-)
[23:25] <jibel_> Ampelbein: you can also browse the package changelog (for bugs with a package) to see if it has been fixed elsewhere.