[07:53] <mvo> tjaalton: I just got a similar bugreport for the nvidia-common issue as you reported yesterday
[07:54] <tjaalton> mvo: I'll reinstall the sucker soonish, so if you want me to backup something before that happens, let me know
[07:55] <tjaalton> I got a Lenovo Ideapad S10e to play with :)
[07:55] <mvo> tjaalton: oh, cool!
[07:55] <mvo> tjaalton: how is the keyboard :) ?
[07:55] <tjaalton> the task is to install jaunty on it
[07:55] <tjaalton> mvo: haven't touched it yet :)
[07:55] <mvo> tjaalton: I looked at the specs and it seems to be pretty cool, but so far the keyboard kept me from the netbooks
[07:55] <mvo> aha
[07:55] <mvo> let me know :)
[07:57] <tjaalton> the keys are flat, which is different from the X61 I'm used to, and the spacing is naturally smaller
[08:08] <mvo> tjaalton: for the nvidia-common issue, I assume that "dpkg -l nvidia-common" shows ii ?
[08:08] <mvo> hey tseliot
[08:08] <tjaalton> mvo: yep
[08:09] <mvo> tjaalton: and grep nvidia /var/cache/debconf/template.dat is empty?
[08:09] <tseliot> hey mvo :-)
[08:09] <tjaalton> mvo: templates.dat, yeah, empty
[08:11] <mvo> tjaalton: thanks, that explains the error, lets see why it happens
[08:11]  * mvo is *so* annoyed by uploads that do not respect vcs-bzr like the recent nvidia-common one
[08:12] <mvo> tseliot: I merge the last upload into bzr if you don't mind and see if I can find out why some people get http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/136835/
[08:13] <tjaalton> mvo: someone suggested that it might be due to a corrupt debconf database, and that colin already fixed it
[08:15] <mvo> tjaalton: oh, is there a bugnumber reference or something?
[08:17] <tseliot> mvo: ok, thanks, I'll merge it with the main branch
[08:17] <slangasek> bug #347648; is this related to a new install?
[08:17] <slangasek> (that bug should only affect recent installs from alternate)
[08:18] <tjaalton> slangasek: yes, this one was a new install from Monday
[08:18] <slangasek> ok, then that's the debconf bug above
[08:19] <mvo> slangasek: just confirmed from the other report, install from today
[08:19] <mvo> (but maybe with a slightly outdated CD
[09:18] <tseliot> mvo: I have just merged from your branch. What's the bug report for that problem?
[09:20] <tseliot> ah, it was fixed by colin
[09:20] <tseliot> in debconf
[09:20] <tseliot> ok
[09:24] <mvo> thanks tseliot
[09:24] <tseliot> np
[09:40] <tseliot> seb128: do you mind if I take care of bug 346964?
[09:40] <seb128> tseliot: not at all, thank you
[09:40] <tseliot> ok :-)
[09:40] <seb128> I've no multi screen config to try that this week anyway
[09:41] <tseliot> I do, and it's very annoying
[09:41] <seb128> the nautilus bug fix can give a clue about what sort of change is required
[09:42] <tseliot> yes, I'm looking at the upstream patch now
[10:25] <Ng> so presumably the no-backwards-time-here! xorg core will land after beta?
[10:34] <tjaalton> Ng: yep
[10:34] <Ng> fair enough :)
[10:35] <tjaalton> at least I haven't heard otherwise
[10:42] <Ng> looks like I was mistaken anyway, I thought the patch had been applied, but the discussions are still continuing
[10:49] <seb128> Ng: it has been uploaded it's just in the queue due to beta freeze
[10:49] <Ng> ah :)
[15:54] <seb128> I've milestoned bug #348428 for jaunty
[15:55] <seb128> that seems to be the bug I'm running into when I switch users since jaunty
[15:55] <seb128> which made me stop using the guest account feature for testing ;-)
[15:55] <seb128> the log has
[15:55] <seb128> ""exaCopyDirty: Pending damage region empty!
[15:55] <seb128> *** glibc detected *** /usr/bin/X: double free or corruption (out): 0x0d73de98 ***
[15:55] <seb128> [15:55] <seb128> /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6[0xb7ba8604]
[15:55] <seb128> /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6(cfree+0x96)[0xb7baa5b6]"
[15:55] <seb128> /usr/lib/libdrm_intel.so.1[0xb77e6837]"
[15:55] <seb128> I reassigned to libdrm_intel because it seems to be due to it
[15:56] <seb128> let me know if that's the wrong component or if you need extra details
[15:56] <jcristau> it's probably the wrong place
[15:56] <jcristau> since that's just where the corruption shows up
[15:59] <seb128> ok
[15:59] <seb128> what would be the best guess?