[00:17] <Ampelbein> hi! could some member of bug-control please set bug #261598 to wishlist? thanks.
[01:58] <hggdh> Ampelbein, done
[07:08] <anakron> HI all
[07:08] <anakron> wich is the repository for 5-a-day applet in intrepid???
[07:08] <anakron> cause i can found it in wiki
[07:15] <anakron> someone can say repositories of 5-a-day applet for intrepid or hardy?
[10:44] <mcas> hello
[10:44] <mcas> i need some help with bug263141
[10:45] <mcas> i need some help with bug 263141
[10:45] <mcas> i think this is the correct behaviour
[10:45] <mcas> so how should i handle this bug
[10:47] <thekorn> mcas, hi, I agree, it is the correct behaviour
[10:47] <mcas> should i comment this and mark it as won't fix?
[10:47] <thekorn> IMO it is invalid
[10:48] <mcas> ah ok
[10:48] <mcas> thanks
[10:48] <thekorn> I would close it as invalid and explain that the keys are ctrl+c and ctrl+v
[10:48] <thekorn> and not ctrl+shift+v
[10:49] <mcas> ok i'll do so
[10:49] <thekorn> super
[10:53] <mcas> done
[22:48] <nullack> Would someone please confirm bug 262027 for me, thanks
[22:53] <james_w> nullack: I think that the package probably didn't fail installation
[22:53] <nullack> james_w It did, and it resulted in X falling back to bulletproof X mode :)
[22:54] <james_w> nullack: I realise it failed, but it looks like it didn't fail
[22:54] <james_w> sorry, cryptic
[22:54] <james_w> it had a problem, but didn't report this with a non-zero exit code of the maintainer script
[22:54] <james_w> so dpkg/apt had no idea that it had a problem
[22:54] <nullack> james_w: If a user upgrades tselliots driver packages and it fails, and it says it fails, synaptic shoould not say the upgrade was "successful". So should I redirect the bug to tseliot on the driver?
[22:55] <james_w> the action is probably run as "something-that-might-fail || true"
[22:55] <nullack> Given hes not sending a fail code?
[22:55] <james_w> so that it doesn't fail the installation
[22:55] <james_w> I think it is a bug in the nvidia package, yes, would you reassign and modify the bug appropriately please?
[22:55] <nullack> Yes I will, thanks mate
[22:56] <james_w> thank you
[22:56] <nullack> Just out of interest do I assume right that devs have a coding standard about errors? Just to be sure this is being consistently done and isnt in other packages as well?
[22:56] <james_w> sometimes this is done intentionally
[22:57] <james_w> e.g. I know it is also done in flashplugin-nonfree
[22:57] <james_w> I don't agree with it there, but it is often a definite choice to do this
[22:58] <nullack> Yeah I can see isolated reasons why it would need to be done sometimes
[22:58] <tseliot> maybe we can report the problem to dkms
[22:59] <andre____> to use bug-buddy instead of apport, i have to create /apps/bug-buddy/run_on_crash and set it to true in gconf?
[22:59] <nullack> Hi tseliot, is the problem with your package or dkms?
[23:00] <tseliot> nullack: both. I have fixed this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/261816
[23:01] <nullack> tseliot : thank you I will edit my bug then
[23:01] <tseliot> but there's still something left in the /var/lob/dkms/nvidia directory
[23:01] <nullack> tseliot : I have another matter I am in the process of raising a bug for, do you have time for a quick discuss?
[23:01] <tseliot> therefore there might still be directories which should have been removed
[23:01] <tseliot> nullack: sure
[23:02] <nullack> tselliot: Thanks. I did a fresh install of yesterdays ubuquity ISO
[23:02] <nullack> tselliot: After the glx install of 177.70 I got sent to bulletproof X
[23:03] <nullack> tselliot: I eventualy resolved it by getting rid of everything in xorg.conf except for the nvidia driver device section
[23:03] <nullack> tselliot: The default conf has items that dont need to be there like loading glx which is done anyway
[23:03] <tseliot> nullack: knowing what was there before would help me diagnose the problem
[23:04] <nullack> tselliot: X was failing because the server layout had a keyboard entry
[23:04] <tseliot> nullack: did it have a serverlayout section too?
[23:04] <nullack> tselliot: yes
[23:05] <nullack> tselliot: It was all debian default, then the glx install added other stuff
[23:05] <tseliot> nullack: and was there an entry about the keyboard in the serverlayout section?
[23:05] <nullack> tselliot: Another user said he installed 177.70 from a fresh install too, and he got booted to bulletproof x on logout, but after reboot was ok
[23:06] <nullack> tselliot: Yes, keyboard in server layout but no keyboard device as HAL configured it
[23:06] <tseliot> nullack: that's a different problem. Doing a sudo rmmod nvidia && sudo modprobe nvidia would have solved the problem
[23:06] <nullack> tselliot: Right, has to be removed and added back with latest I understand
[23:07] <tseliot> yes, or simply reboot
[23:07] <nullack> tselliot: Anyway, it seems to me that the install is adding stuff to the xorg.conf that isnt needed and HAL is setting it all up anyway
[23:08] <tseliot> adding glx won't cause any problem, however you might want to file a bug report with the original xorg.conf about the problems with input devices
[23:09] <nullack> tselliot: I will do that thanks. Im a big fan of your work and Im grateful that you always quickly get out new nvidia drivers once they are released. Top stuff :)
[23:09] <tseliot> ;)
[23:29] <sectech> howdie
[23:29] <sectech> For hardy,  has any of the kernel developers addressed the issue of the "suspend to ram" kernel panic being fixed for hardy?
[23:30] <sectech> one too many hardy's
[23:30] <james_w> hi sectech
[23:31] <sectech> I know they wanted to move forward to 2.6.27... problem is that the people running hardy now that don't follow bugs are kinda screwed up right now
[23:31] <james_w> is there a bug for it?
[23:31] <sectech> james_w,  the closest that I can see is 251252
[23:31] <james_w> #ubuntu-kernel is probably a better place for these questions, they will be more knowledgeable.
[23:32] <sectech> james_w,  true...  they would be... but probably were asked the question 1000 times already
[23:33] <sectech> 2.6.27 fixes the problem...  but the hardy users arn't getting that kernel as far as I know
[23:34] <james_w> I doubt they will
[23:34] <e-jat> use intrepid main repo ... then u will get the 2.6.27-2
[23:34] <james_w> if you know it fixes it you can "bisect" to find the fix, and then that can be applied in hardy.
[23:35] <sectech> james_w,  I guess my issue is that _I_ know how to get around it... but what about the other hardy users...
[23:35] <james_w> that's the right instinct, and if you could point towards the fix I'm sure the developers would apply it to the hardy kernel.
[23:37] <sectech> james_w,  imagine they would... I am still trying to find out how wide spread the bug is... I have been off for a few weeks and I just noticed this now
[23:37] <sectech> it was affecting my laptop for the last couple days,  this is the first day I could look into it
[23:37] <sectech> there might be a fix out there.
[23:46] <nullack> Can I please get a second opinion on bug 262788 - The user has now attached required logs and Im thinking about making the package APCI rather than the Linux kernel?
[23:48] <james_w> is there such a package?
[23:50] <sectech> james_w,  I was getting in a panic for nothing... I had the proposed repository enabled by accident
[23:50] <james_w> you have the problem with -proposed, but not with -updates?
[23:52] <james_w> ah, there is an acpi package, I'm not sure it should be moved there though, I would still suspect the kernel.
[23:52] <sectech> james_w,  With proposed packages arn't out of testing yet...
[23:52] <sectech> if an end user enabled that repository, they do so at there own risk
[23:52] <sectech> in my opinonj
[23:52] <sectech> err opinion
[23:53] <nullack> james_w: thanks Ill leave the package with the kernel and I guess the kernel devs can drill down from there
[23:53] <sectech> I tried to keep this laptop as "end user" friendly as possible... my desktop is used for testing... I guess I must have hit that by mistake
[23:53] <james_w> sectech: they are there for testing, if you find a regression in a package in -proposed please file a bug and state that it is a regression in -proposed package, otherwise it will be moved to -updates and more people will be exposed to it
[23:54] <sectech> james_w,  I am looking at that part now...
[23:55] <james_w> thanks
[23:55] <sectech> that would be very bad if that hits -updates
[23:56] <sectech> james_w,  I actually have a guy on #ubuntu-kernel (not part of the devel or any other team) trying to tell me that a kernel panic isn't important.
[23:56] <sectech> lol