[00:17] hi! could some member of bug-control please set bug #261598 to wishlist? thanks. [00:17] Launchpad bug 261598 in ubuntu "[needs-packaging] seahorse-plugins" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/261598 [01:58] Ampelbein, done === jjesse_ is now known as jjesse === LucidFox is now known as LucidFox_WoW [07:08] HI all [07:08] wich is the repository for 5-a-day applet in intrepid??? [07:08] cause i can found it in wiki [07:15] someone can say repositories of 5-a-day applet for intrepid or hardy? === mcas_away is now known as mcas === Igorots is now known as Igorot [10:44] hello [10:44] i need some help with bug263141 [10:45] i need some help with bug 263141 [10:45] Launchpad bug 263141 in firefox-3.0 "Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V does not work with Caps Lock active" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/263141 [10:45] i think this is the correct behaviour [10:45] so how should i handle this bug [10:47] mcas, hi, I agree, it is the correct behaviour [10:47] should i comment this and mark it as won't fix? [10:47] IMO it is invalid [10:48] ah ok [10:48] thanks [10:48] I would close it as invalid and explain that the keys are ctrl+c and ctrl+v [10:48] and not ctrl+shift+v [10:49] ok i'll do so [10:49] super [10:53] done === mcas is now known as mcas_away === asac_ is now known as asac === mcas_away is now known as mcas === warp10_ is now known as warp10 === mcas is now known as mcas_away === Initial_2 is now known as Initial_M === bcurtiswx1 is now known as bcurtiswx [22:48] Would someone please confirm bug 262027 for me, thanks [22:48] Launchpad bug 262027 in synaptic "Synaptic Erroneously Reports Success on Fail" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/262027 [22:53] nullack: I think that the package probably didn't fail installation [22:53] james_w It did, and it resulted in X falling back to bulletproof X mode :) [22:54] nullack: I realise it failed, but it looks like it didn't fail [22:54] sorry, cryptic [22:54] it had a problem, but didn't report this with a non-zero exit code of the maintainer script [22:54] so dpkg/apt had no idea that it had a problem [22:54] 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] the action is probably run as "something-that-might-fail || true" [22:55] Given hes not sending a fail code? [22:55] so that it doesn't fail the installation [22:55] I think it is a bug in the nvidia package, yes, would you reassign and modify the bug appropriately please? [22:55] Yes I will, thanks mate [22:56] thank you [22:56] 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] sometimes this is done intentionally [22:57] e.g. I know it is also done in flashplugin-nonfree [22:57] I don't agree with it there, but it is often a definite choice to do this [22:58] Yeah I can see isolated reasons why it would need to be done sometimes [22:58] maybe we can report the problem to dkms [22:59] 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] Hi tseliot, is the problem with your package or dkms? [23:00] nullack: both. I have fixed this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/261816 [23:00] Launchpad bug 261816 in linux-restricted-modules-envy-2.6.24 "nvidia: Multiple versions in DKMS" [Medium,In progress] [23:01] tseliot : thank you I will edit my bug then [23:01] but there's still something left in the /var/lob/dkms/nvidia directory [23:01] 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] therefore there might still be directories which should have been removed [23:01] nullack: sure [23:02] tselliot: Thanks. I did a fresh install of yesterdays ubuquity ISO [23:02] tselliot: After the glx install of 177.70 I got sent to bulletproof X [23:03] tselliot: I eventualy resolved it by getting rid of everything in xorg.conf except for the nvidia driver device section [23:03] tselliot: The default conf has items that dont need to be there like loading glx which is done anyway [23:03] nullack: knowing what was there before would help me diagnose the problem [23:04] tselliot: X was failing because the server layout had a keyboard entry [23:04] nullack: did it have a serverlayout section too? [23:04] tselliot: yes [23:05] tselliot: It was all debian default, then the glx install added other stuff [23:05] nullack: and was there an entry about the keyboard in the serverlayout section? [23:05] 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] tselliot: Yes, keyboard in server layout but no keyboard device as HAL configured it [23:06] nullack: that's a different problem. Doing a sudo rmmod nvidia && sudo modprobe nvidia would have solved the problem [23:06] tselliot: Right, has to be removed and added back with latest I understand [23:07] yes, or simply reboot [23:07] 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] 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] 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] ;) [23:29] howdie [23:29] For hardy, has any of the kernel developers addressed the issue of the "suspend to ram" kernel panic being fixed for hardy? [23:30] one too many hardy's [23:30] hi sectech [23:31] 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] is there a bug for it? [23:31] james_w, the closest that I can see is 251252 [23:31] #ubuntu-kernel is probably a better place for these questions, they will be more knowledgeable. [23:32] james_w, true... they would be... but probably were asked the question 1000 times already [23:33] 2.6.27 fixes the problem... but the hardy users arn't getting that kernel as far as I know [23:34] I doubt they will [23:34] use intrepid main repo ... then u will get the 2.6.27-2 [23:34] if you know it fixes it you can "bisect" to find the fix, and then that can be applied in hardy. [23:35] james_w, I guess my issue is that _I_ know how to get around it... but what about the other hardy users... [23:35] 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] 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] it was affecting my laptop for the last couple days, this is the first day I could look into it [23:37] there might be a fix out there. [23:46] 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? [23:46] Launchpad bug 262788 in linux "linux 2.6.27 kernel won't boot on amd64 hp laptop" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/262788 [23:48] is there such a package? [23:50] james_w, I was getting in a panic for nothing... I had the proposed repository enabled by accident [23:50] you have the problem with -proposed, but not with -updates? [23:52] ah, there is an acpi package, I'm not sure it should be moved there though, I would still suspect the kernel. [23:52] james_w, With proposed packages arn't out of testing yet... [23:52] if an end user enabled that repository, they do so at there own risk [23:52] in my opinonj [23:52] err opinion [23:53] james_w: thanks Ill leave the package with the kernel and I guess the kernel devs can drill down from there [23:53] 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] 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] james_w, I am looking at that part now... [23:55] thanks [23:55] that would be very bad if that hits -updates [23:56] 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] lol