[02:03] <hggdh> gnome bug  569411
[04:06] <zetabyt_> hey i'm new here
[06:05] <dholbach> good morning
[06:12] <maco> mornin
[08:00] <Hew> What should we do about public bugs that still have coredumps?
[09:06] <andol> How does "Ubuntu Sponsors for main" and "Ubuntu Sponsors for universe" work? Are those subsribers you yourself can add when you have debdiff-solution, like to get someones attention? Or do they subscribe themselves?
[09:06] <dholbach> andol: you subscribe them
[09:06] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProces
[09:06] <dholbach> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess
[09:06] <dholbach> sorry
[09:08] <dholbach> basically it's the "reviewer team"
[09:08] <andol> dholbach: thank you
[09:09] <dholbach> andol: if you have any more specific questions about packaging, development, sponsoring and stuff feel free to stop by in #ubuntu-motu :)
[09:10] <andol> dholbach: Will do
[09:10] <dholbach> rock on!
[09:20] <BUGabundo> good morning
[09:20] <BUGabundo> need an advice
[09:20] <BUGabundo> when my webcam is turned on by Flash in Firefox
[09:20] <BUGabundo> it won't turn off again, until I restart the browser
[09:20] <BUGabundo> is that a bug in FF, Flash, webcam driver?
[09:53] <maxb> mvo: Hi, maybe you could direct me to the proper place to file this? On intrepid->jaunty, linux-doc got kept back because apt didn't want to remove linux-doc-2.6.27 in favour of linux-doc-2.6.28. Do I file against linux. linux-meta, or update-manager? (If you know?)
[09:54] <mvo> maxb: update-manager for now, if you could attach the upgrade logs, I have a look
[09:55] <maxb> thanks
[09:55] <mvo> maxb: please give me the bugnumber when its there (apt.log is the one I'm mainly interessted in)
[14:04] <AbtZ> ok, im starting a bit early on the hug day. i found a bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/+bug/221698) that i can confirm. can i just do this, or is there something else i should do too?
[14:10] <pedro_> AbtZ: yes please, also add a comment saying which version of Ubuntu / Compiz you're currently running
[14:10] <pedro_> AbtZ: don't forget to edit the wiki and put your name on it
[14:22] <davmor2> Guys I'm having an issue with jaunty.  When I've had a major update and the restart icon appear on the panel if I click on it and select restart now it only logs out rather than reboots is anyone experiencing this?
[14:32] <maxb> occasionally, yes. Not reproducibly
[14:52] <davmor2> hey guys is apport on the fritz I got a crash with bluez on jaunty and it's trying to send the bug to file:///ubuntu/+.....  I'm guessing it should be something like https://launchpad.net/........
[14:53] <charlie-tca> Known bug, davmor2. bug 315966
[14:53] <davmor2> charlie-tca: ta :)
[14:54] <charlie-tca> no problem.
[19:36] <jgoguen> question about https://launchpad.net/bugs/312483 - the reporter is using thunderbird 3, but the bug is equally valid for thunderbird 2.0.0.19, so should this one be marked as Confirmed and the user informed that thunderbird 3 isn't provided by Ubuntu?
[19:37] <mrooney> jgoguen: that sounds pretty reasonable!
[19:38] <jgoguen> thanks mrooney :)
[19:38] <mrooney> I would just explain that v3 isn't supported but you confirmed the bug in v2
[19:50] <skorasaurus> my question is, if I am triaging, should I try to see if the bug has already been fixed upstream (in a newer developmental version) or try to reproduce it ?
[19:51] <skorasaurus> (which one should I do first) ?
[19:51] <skorasaurus> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage#Confirming doesn't state which order I should do it in.
[19:53] <jmarsden|work> skorasaurus: Do whichever you think will be easier/quicker first :)
[19:53] <hggdh> if it seems a valid bug, you can (and should) check upstream
[19:53] <skorasaurus> jmarsden, k. thanks.
[19:54] <skorasaurus> hggdh, i understand that, but sometimes it seems more work trying to reproduce it than finding out that it's already been fixed upstream.
[19:54] <skorasaurus> so, it's on a case by case basis.
[19:55] <hggdh> skorasaurus, yes.
[19:55] <hggdh> btw, not only fixed, but also still open upstream
[19:56] <andersk> Bug 295127 seems to be getting no attention because it is marked Fix Released, but still requires an Intrepid SRU update.  Is there anything I can do to get someone to look at it?
[19:58] <hggdh> the MOTU SRU is already subscribed.
[19:58] <hggdh> perhaps a nicer comment would do the trick
[19:58] <hggdh> or a debdiff
[19:58] <andersk> I just added a debdiff.
[19:59] <hggdh> good. Thanks
[19:59] <skorasaurus> if it's fixed upstream, then should I confirm it then ? the howtotriage guide doesn't say anymore than just only to confirm it. (even though a fix has been released, upstream).
[20:08] <jmarsden|work> skorasaurus: Document in a comment that it is fixed upstream, in what version, and how you know that, and then confirm it.  At least, that's what I would do.
[20:38] <shaman87> hi
[20:39] <shaman87> i've got a problem. i'm not sure it is a bug or not, but i hope you van help me :)
[20:39] <shaman87> *can
[20:40] <Elbrus> shaman87: usually you can just ask your question
[20:40] <shaman87> so the problem is, when i copy files to or from my external usb2 sata drive, my whole system gets slow, the load is seriously high, especially, when copying from that drive
[20:40] <shaman87> the external drive is an 1TB samsung, with an 800 GB resierfs partition
[20:40] <shaman87> and the rest is an ntfs partition
[20:41] <shaman87> the problem is the same with the reiserfs and the ntfs
[20:41] <shaman87> but with ntfs the load is even higher
[20:41] <shaman87> so
[20:41] <shaman87> can i do something about this?
[20:42] <shaman87> i just switched to ubuntu from windows and i really find this issue annoying
[20:42] <shaman87> and oh, i forgot, the copy speed is ok. (reiser: 18-20 MB/s, ntfs:14-18 MB/s)
[20:43]  * Elbrus doesn't know enough about this to help, but I guess it depends on what you really do, copy from one filesystem to an other?
[20:44] <shaman87> my system disk is in ext3
[20:44] <shaman87> and the computer is a dell laptop
[20:44] <shaman87> one of my friend said that the kernels usb driver can cause this
[20:44] <Elbrus> the best place to look is launchpad and see if somebody reported a similar bug report
[20:45] <shaman87> maybe  i can wait for a new kernel or the 9.04 ubuntu and see what happens? :D
[20:45] <shaman87> ok
[20:45] <Elbrus> https://bugs.launchpad.net/
[20:46] <Elbrus> if you really suspect a kernel driver, you might need to tweek somewhere (I know, it should work out of the box, but that just is not true sometimes)
[20:47] <shaman87> yeah, but what to tweek? :) I google it,  know :)
[20:50] <shaman87> i tried searching on launchpad, but all i got is that file transers with usb are slow
[20:50] <shaman87> and that isn't my problem :(
[20:55] <bdmurray> shaman87: you might test it with a Jaunty (9.04) live cd
[20:57] <shaman87> hmmm
[20:57] <shaman87> i will :)
[20:59] <shaman87> and does that makes difference if  i use another usb port? i just realised that i never tried it :)
[21:00] <hggdh> shaman87, it might, if the ports are under different USB controllers
[21:01] <shaman87> i will try it, thank you
[21:23] <shaman87> and there is another thing: firefox very often crashes on sites with flash (like google analytics). I heard that this is the problem because the poor flash support of adobe
[21:23] <shaman87> or can i help this somehow?
[21:25] <maco> shaman87: if you use nspluginwrapper, then just flash crashes without taking firefox with it. this however can cause audio problems because nspluginwrapper needs ia32libs which conflicts with libasound2-plugins (i think that's the package) because they both provide a certain file
[21:27] <shaman87> ok
[21:28] <shaman87> and what is  nspluginwrapper ? a FF extension? or just a package? And when flash crashes, how can i restart it?
[21:29] <maco> its a wrapper for browser plugins so you can use 32bit plugins (like flash) on 64bit linux
[21:31] <shaman87> it's installed on my system
[21:32] <maco> you can use it to install flash in there, but ive never done it. i use open source flash
[21:34] <shaman87> which package?
[21:34] <shaman87> by the way i use ubuntu 8.10 64-bit version
[21:35] <shaman87> my friend suggested that i should use the 32 bitt version and the problems would be gone
[21:35] <shaman87> could that be true?
[21:35] <maco> wait so then youre already using flash in nspluginwrapper?
[21:35] <maco> or are you using the native 64bit flash 10 alpha?
[21:35] <shaman87> nspluginwrapper is on my computer
[21:35] <shaman87> but i never did anything with it
[21:35] <maco> how did you install flash?
[21:36] <shaman87> from firefox :S
[21:36] <maco> ...
[21:37] <maco> does that mean you clicked an apturl flashplugin-nonfree, an apturl adobe-flashplugin, or that you went to adobe.com?
[21:37] <shaman87> sorry, im a beginner :)
[21:37] <shaman87> i went to adobe.com
[21:37] <maco> and did you get adobe flash 9 or 10?
[21:39] <shaman87> 10
[21:39] <maco> do you realize that flash 10 is only in alpha state?
[21:40] <maco> its not an ubuntu bug at all. it's adobe's bug, and it's because you're using software that's nowhere near done being written.
[21:40] <shaman87> oooooh i didn't know that this is only alpha, sorry
[21:41] <shaman87> you suggest that i should switch to flash 9?
[21:41] <maco> well if you use flash 9 by installing the adobe-flashplugin or flashplugin-nonfree from the repos, i think itll install inside nspluginwrapper
[21:41] <maco> and then it shouldnt be able to crash firefox
[21:41] <maco> there is no flash 9 native for 64bit
[21:42] <shaman87> okay, ill try that too after i finished sem things
[21:42] <shaman87> thank you for helping me out
[22:05] <salty-horse> can anyone reproduce this vim bug? http://vim.pastey.net/107185