[00:00] <Laibsch> Is there any kind of policy when how the following situation should be dealt with?  a required package A used to recommend package A-plugin in Jaunty.  A-plugin is dropped from Karmic and it may be that package A is now providing the functionality itself (not sure).  A-plugin in turn depends on A (= ${binary:Version}), IOW same version as itself.
[00:02] <Laibsch> This makes A-plugin uninstallable in Karmic.  A in Karmic does not Provides A-Plugin nor is there any other information to tell aptitude how to resolve the situation.  aptitude and thus the user is left guessing and there is the possibility to guess wrong.
[00:05] <Laibsch> I wonder if that constitutes a bug or not.  I think it does.
[00:06] <micahg> why would you want to install a-lugin?
[00:12] <Laibsch> in Jaunty or Karmic?
[00:12] <Laibsch> I will assume you mean in Karmic
[00:12] <Laibsch> The thing is that I don't install recommended packages by default
[00:12] <Laibsch> I have installed A-plugin explicitly
[00:13] <Laibsch> And in general, packages being uninstalled raise an extra flag making me wonder what will provide that functionality or if I don't need it anymore
[00:14] <Laibsch> But the more relevant issue here is that aptitude's resolve mechanism does not work reliably here when it's not being given extra information
[00:15] <Laibsch> I am wondering if there is no requirement to help aptitude and the user when doing such an upgrade
[00:15] <Laibsch> That may not be the case which is why I'm here asking
[00:16] <micahg> Laibsch: if it did indeed take over for the plugin, then it should conflict with the plugin
[00:16] <micahg> you should probably ask about the speicifc package in ubuntu-motu
[00:17] <Laibsch> That's the thing, I don't know if it did
[00:17] <micahg> ok, check the changelof
[00:17] <micahg> or check launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pkgname
[00:18] <micahg> what apckage
[00:19] <Laibsch> nothing in there
[00:20] <Laibsch> upstart and upstart-logd
[00:20] <Laibsch> But this is really a more general question
[00:22] <micahg> normally they conflict
[00:23] <micahg> but youll want to ask Keybuk
[00:23] <micahg> you can find him in here: #ubuntu-devel
[00:43] <jander99> The worst part about looking at old bugs is that there is really no good way to test them.
[00:43] <bcurtiswx> jander99: the best way to get rid of old bugs is look for duplicates
[00:45] <micahg> +1
[00:46] <BUGabundo> jander99: and have new triagers ask for more info on 2yo bugs :))
[00:46] <BUGabundo> just had that today and yesterday
[00:46] <BUGabundo> a bug from jan 2008
[00:46] <BUGabundo> LOLOL
[00:47] <micahg> yeah, generally better off checking for dupes
[00:47] <jander99> checking for dupes now.  bug 24817.  no typo, only 5 numbers long.  And I have no idea when Gnome switched from offering nfs or smb shares to just smb shares.
[00:48] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 24817 in system-tools-backends "nfs-kernel-server 1:1.0.7-3ubuntu1 is buggy with gnome" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/24817
[00:48] <BUGabundo> ahahaha
[00:48] <BUGabundo> like bug 1?
[00:48] <BUGabundo> it messes my email view
[00:48] <ubot4> BUGabundo: Error: Could not parse data returned by Launchpad: The read operation timed out
[00:48] <BUGabundo> it stays out of order 'cause of that
[00:50] <micahg> check for dup is probably the best option
[00:52] <micahg> user server appears to have been dropped after intrepid
[00:52] <micahg> kernerl server is still going
[00:52] <bcurtiswx> ?
[00:52] <micahg> check the changelog of kernel server and/or system-tools-backends
[00:52] <micahg> nfs
[00:53] <bcurtiswx> ah, ok
[00:53] <jander99> well also gnome doesnt give the ability to choose which method to share, it defaults to samba using the method the bug describes
[00:53] <jander99> also launchpad needs a nice dupe checker like Digg has :P
[00:53] <micahg> digg is url based...
[00:54] <micahg> jander99: apport does dupe checking...
[00:55] <jander99> their dupe checker looks through content as well. and yes apport does when its an apport bug because all apport bugs are formatted in a standard way and its easy to check :-\   Guess I'm hoping for an easy button to run a manual check and at least give a list of likely dupes
[00:55]  * BUGabundo /sbin/movearse sofa /dev/bed; ln -s eyeupperlid eyelowerlid
[00:56] <micahg> only symbolic link BUGabundo?
[00:56] <BUGabundo> I'll have to rm it in a few hours
[00:56] <BUGabundo> hard link would be a be choise :)
[00:57] <bcurtiswx> when he wakes up its a hard link and he needs to unbind them
[00:57] <BUGabundo> ahah
[02:12]  * Laibsch is looking for confirmation of bug 402001
[02:12] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 402001 in thunderbird "mouse position and cursor position don't always match in karmic" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402001
[02:18] <micahg> Laibsch: it works in jaunty?
[02:18] <Laibsch> I think it did
[02:18] <Laibsch> I'm actually pretty sure it did
[02:19] <micahg> ok, then it's probably not a thunderbird problem as thunderbird didn't change from jaunty to karmic
[02:19] <Laibsch> OK
[02:19] <micahg> I'd say try #ubuntu-x
[02:19] <Laibsch> you think this is bug in X?
[02:20] <micahg> that or GTK
[02:20] <Laibsch> Do you experience this issue?
[02:20] <micahg> I'm trying to figure out what the issue is
[02:20] <Laibsch> OK, sorry if the information was insufficient
[02:20] <micahg> I can't see the mouse in the second screen
[02:20] <Laibsch> 1) use a three-pane layout
[02:21] <Laibsch> Oh, wait a minute
[02:21] <Laibsch> This is hard to capture
[02:21] <Laibsch> And for privacy reasons, I did not want to show a video
[02:21] <micahg> I guess you can't do a screenshot
[02:21] <micahg> can you make a new profile with an empty box?
[02:21] <Laibsch> I did
[02:21] <micahg> did it have the same symptoms?
[02:22] <Laibsch> yes
[02:22] <micahg> I'm saying without you loading your data
[02:22] <Laibsch> I just made such addition to the description
[02:22] <Laibsch> to verify it was not a problem with the add-ons
[02:22] <micahg> yes,
[02:22] <micahg> I'm wondering if you can recreate a video with an empty profile
[02:22] <Laibsch> Indeed, that is pretty stupid ;-)
[02:22] <Laibsch> The mouse pointer is in the pixelized part ;-)
[02:23] <micahg> maybe I'm just too tires
[02:23] <micahg> tired
[02:23] <Laibsch> It's about four to five folders down from "Sent" where the cursor is
[02:23] <micahg> you can try in #ubuntu-mozillateam tomorrow
[02:24] <micahg> sorry
[02:24] <Laibsch> OK
[02:24] <Laibsch> thanks for your help
[02:24] <Laibsch> Just a very quick question
[02:24] <micahg> unless someone else here has something to add
[02:24] <Laibsch> Can you successfully move a mail to a folder that appears way down towards the lower end of a three-pane layout?
[02:25] <Laibsch> That is basically the issue
[02:25] <micahg> kakemann: I added the second one you found, I don't know if the first one was correct
[02:25] <micahg> yes\
[02:25] <Laibsch> I can move it, but I have to move the mouse-pointer about four to five folders lower than the actual target
[02:25] <Laibsch> darn
[02:26] <micahg> hmm
[02:26] <micahg> any other apps act like that?
[02:26] <micahg> like your file explorer?
[02:28] <Laibsch> I tried thunar and nautilus
[02:29] <micahg> and?
[02:29] <Laibsch> Their layout is off course a bit different
[02:29] <Laibsch> I had no issues
[02:29] <micahg> yes
[02:29] <micahg> ok
[02:29] <micahg> hmmm
[02:29] <micahg> well, I don't have a chance to check upstream right now
[02:29] <micahg> #ubuntu-mozillateam would probably be your best bet
[02:30] <Laibsch> OK, thanks
[02:30] <Laibsch> I already looked in bugzilla.mozilla.org, found no obvious candidates, but it can be hard to find stuff there
[02:30] <micahg> well, you can limit to thunderbird
[02:31] <micahg> yeah
[02:31] <micahg> sometimes I open upstream tasks with no bug because I don't have time to find it
[02:31] <micahg> and people like kakemann go and find them for me :)
[07:24] <thekorn> good morning
[07:24] <micahg> good morning
[07:24] <micahg> have you seen bug 402073 yet?
[07:24] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 402073 in ubuntu "[needs-packaging] launchpad" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402073
[07:25] <micahg> launchpad has finally been open sourced :)
[07:31] <thekorn> w000t?
[07:31] <thekorn> are you kidding me?
[07:31] <thekorn> ;)
[07:31] <micahg> nope
[07:35]  * micahg loves backport stuff
[07:35] <micahg> *backporting
[08:27] <kakemann> micahg, thanks for looking into it
[08:30] <micahg> np, thank you!
[08:35] <micahg> ping mvo_
[08:39] <mvo_> hey micahg
[08:40] <micahg> hi mvo_, would you prefer synaptic bugs upstreamed to debiian or somewhere else?
[08:41] <mvo_> micahg: launchpad upstream tasks should be fine, the same people (i.e. me) look at debian and LP
[08:41] <mvo_> micahg: did you found particular interessting ones?
[08:42] <micahg> well, one I picked up for the hugday last week
[08:42] <micahg> bug 122047
[08:42] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 122047 in synaptic "No way to view explicity installed packages, excluding automatically installed packages" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/122047
[08:42] <micahg> I was about to upstream to debian
[08:42] <micahg> I thought it was a good idea
[08:44] <mvo_> micahg: its not a bad idea :) but I don't think its needed, let me have a look at it now
[08:44] <micahg> ok, I'll cancel the upstream request
[08:45] <mvo_> micahg: ok
[08:45] <micahg> I already commented on one bug upstream that it exists in LP
[08:47] <mvo_> micahg: which one was that? it seems to be not in my bugmail inbox for some reason :/
[08:47] <micahg> debian bug 442421
[08:47] <ubot4> Debian bug 442421 in synaptic "recommends gksu (without alternatives)" [Normal,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/442421
[08:48] <mvo_> aha, thanks
[08:48] <micahg> that way you can close both at once :)
[08:48] <mvo_> :)
[08:48] <mvo_> indeed
[08:48] <micahg> should I set the first one I showed you to wishlist triaged?
[08:51] <mvo_> micahg: please
[08:53] <micahg> done
[08:53] <micahg> thanks
[08:53] <mvo_> thanks
[08:56]  * micahg is off to bed
[08:56] <mvo_> good night!
[08:57] <micahg> night
[15:42] <bddebian> Boo
[19:29] <pedro_> bdmurray, hello, have you seen bug 396531 ?
[19:29] <ubot4> pedro_: Bug 396531 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/396531 is private
[19:30] <pedro_> bdmurray, do you know of any workaround? I'm getting the same crash every time i run bughelper
[19:31] <bdmurray> pedro_: I haven't, but I'm looking at it now
[19:32] <pedro_> thanks
[19:46] <pedro_> Kamusin, still working on the last hug day heh? ;-)
[19:47] <Kamusin> pedro_, of course dude :)
[19:47]  * pedro_ hugs Kamusin
[19:48] <pedro_> Kamusin, on Thursday we're having one based on Evolution in case you have some spare hours that day :-)
[19:50] <Kamusin> pedro_, yeah! I have already marked --remember my hug-day tools,  I really hope improve my triaging skills this days   :)
[19:50] <pedro_> woohoo!
[19:55] <bdmurray> thekorn: Have you seen bug 396531?  it seems related to python2.6
[19:55] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 396531 in bughelper "bughelper crashed with TypeError in __init__() - Read only attribute" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/396531
[19:56] <thekorn> bdmurray, no not yet, looking at it now
[19:57] <thekorn> bdmurray, can you reproduce this bug?
[19:57] <bdmurray> thekorn: yes are you using karmic and python2.6?
[19:58] <thekorn> bdmurray, I'm using jaunty, with python2.6
[19:58] <bdmurray> thekorn: hmmm
[19:58] <thekorn> bdmurray, so bughelper crashes on karmic with python2.6 bughelper ?
[19:59] <bdmurray> thekorn: that's correct
[20:00] <bdmurray> the packages should be the same for jaunty vs karmic
[20:02] <thekorn> bdmurray, can you please chech if this reproduces the bug? http://paste.ubuntu.com/223777/
[20:02] <thekorn> s/chech/check
[20:02] <rrittenhouse> Anyone else having the issue of when you mouse-over the gnome-system-monitor applet, that is inserted into the top bar, making dropouts in the graph everytime you put your mouse up there?
[20:03] <rrittenhouse> I'm running 9.04
[20:03] <bdmurray> thekorn: it does cause the same error
[20:03] <rrittenhouse> I go there to mouse-over and see how much bandwidth im using and it makes dropouts =/
[20:04] <thekorn> bdmurray, ok, than it is a bug in py-lp-bugs or in python2.6, investigating further now
[20:09] <thekorn> bdmurray, karmic has python 2.6.3, correct?
[20:10] <bdmurray> thekorn: Installed: 2.6.2-0ubuntu2
[20:15] <thekorn> bdmurray, ok, now I'm confused ;) what does python2.6 -V return
[20:15] <thekorn> if it is 2.6.3, it is a bug because of http://bugs.python.org/issue5890
[20:16] <bdmurray> thekorn: Python 2.6.2+
[20:19] <thekorn> bdmurray, can you please test if this still fails? http://paste.ubuntu.com/223792/
[20:21] <bdmurray> thekorn: yes, still failes
[20:22] <thekorn> argh, I will try to setup a karmic vm tomorrow morning
[20:22] <thekorn> and try to find a fix
[20:22] <thekorn> there was definitly a change in the property type,
[20:23] <thekorn> but it does not seem to be documented somewhere
[20:24] <bdmurray> thekorn: okay, thanks!
[20:28] <thekorn> no worries
[20:31] <bdmurray> thekorn: oh by the way are you using launchpadlib much?
[20:33] <thekorn> bdmurray, I'm working on some projects which use launchpadlib,
[20:34] <thekorn> but I'm not this ind of user who has daily cronjob running to dump the lp database ;)
[20:34] <bdmurray> thekorn: so I think searchTasks only accepts True of False for 'has_no_package'.  I wish it'd take it both somehow
[20:34] <thekorn> so I would say: "not much" but I'm using it
[20:35] <bdmurray> or if I could append to the tasks collection that'd be fine
[20:36] <bdmurray> just wondering if you'd run into this or something like it before
[20:38] <thekorn> bdmurray, can't you just run two querries?
[20:38] <thekorn> it should not make any difference
[20:38] <thekorn> so what you want is a OR condition, if I understand this correctly
[20:39] <bdmurray> yes, I could run two queries but I'd rather have 1 collection in the end to work with than 2
[20:39] <bdmurray> yes, an OR condition is what I want
[20:42] <thekorn> the good thing about today is: we can now all work on implementing such things ;)
[20:42] <bdmurray> heh
[20:43] <thekorn> but I doubt something like this will ever be acceppted, as the API only refelcts what's possible with the web UI
[20:44] <bdmurray> Hmm, I don't have an example but think there is some stuff in the api that is not in the webui
[20:45] <thekorn> ok, maybe you are right
[20:53] <thekorn> bdmurray, as long as you are not interested in any attributes of a collection maybe something like this is useful: http://paste.ubuntu.com/223819/
[21:23] <bdmurray> thekorn: thanks!
[21:36] <plars> bcurtiswx: is that true that a bug cannot be marked triage without forwarding it upstream first?
[21:38] <micahg> plars: depends if it's a bug in an upstream product or not
[21:39] <plars> bcurtiswx: I'm also a curious as to why you consider it wishlist instead of low.  I had assumed low since it is a mostly cosmetic/usability issue
[21:40] <plars> micahg: actually in this case I don't believe there's even a debian package available for it, but in a general sense, it seems odd that it should be required to upstream a bug, given that the bug could only exist in the ubuntu version of the package and not upstream
[21:40] <micahg> plars: which bug?
[21:41] <plars> micahg: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/378055
[21:41] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 378055 in maximus "Empathy buddy list not in maximus blacklist." [Wishlist,Confirmed]
[21:43] <plars> I know, of course, that we want to upstream where ever we possibly can, but I don't remember seeing anywhere that it was policy that it was required before a bug could be considered triaged - albeit I admit I'm still fairly new at this.  That's why I'm asking here to try to find out
[21:44] <micahg> It depends if it's an upstreamable bug or not
[21:44] <micahg> I'm not familiar with the apps
[21:45] <micahg> I understand your position plars, but I cannot really comment as I don't know where the fix needs to be
[21:45] <micahg> bcurtiswx will probably be back shortl
[21:45] <micahg> y
[21:45] <plars> micahg: the fix for this particular issue is in maximus
[21:45] <micahg> yes, but whether it's a debian/ubuntu/ubuntuunr fix
[21:46] <plars> micahg: but the more general question I had was - "Does a bug need to be upstreamed before it can be considered to be triaged"
[21:46] <bdmurray> plars: no
[21:47] <plars> bdmurray: thanks
[21:47] <micahg> bdmurray: doesn't it depend on the package?
[21:50] <bdmurray> micahg: no, why would it?
[22:24] <james_w> bcurtiswx: Ubuntu *is* upstream for maximus
[22:27] <micahg> bdmurray: hmmm, I just found the flow chart: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage/Charts
[22:27] <micahg> I thought a bug went from confirmed to triaged once it was upstreamed if it was upstreamable
[22:28] <micahg> maybe that's just for mozilla stuff...
[22:29] <micahg> I thought triaged meant bug squad was done
[22:32] <bdmurray> that might be the mozilla team's policy but that would be the exception to the general rule
[22:33] <micahg> How can a bug be triaged if it needs to be fixed upstream and there is no task?
[22:33]  * micahg isn't trying to be difficult
[22:33]  * micahg just wants to understand
[22:35] <bdmurray> its possible that a triager might not be able to determine if the bug exists in patches specific to the ubuntu package or if it is in the software proper, so a developer should look at it therefore it should be triaged
[22:36] <bdmurray> we don't want to flood upstream with our bug reports
[22:36] <bdmurray> our with bugs that are specific to us
[22:36] <bdmurray> ideally most triaged bugs will be forwarded but it isn't a requirement
[22:37] <micahg> ok, I guess I took it for granted that bug control members would know more about the packages in general
[22:37] <bdmurray> with thousands of packages its hard to know about everyone
[22:38] <micahg> right, but I thought then it was better to ask
[22:38] <micahg> ok, I'll update my internal policies to reflect this :)
[22:38] <micahg> so I don't misinform people
[22:40] <micahg> bdmurray: mozilla is probably unusual in that almost everything needs to be fixed upstream
[22:49] <micahg> bdmurray: asac confirmed mozilla is the same as everything else...hmmm...
[22:50] <bdmurray> good, the goal is not to have exceptions for certain packages / areas
[22:50]  * micahg was obviously mistaken
[22:50] <bdmurray> having different policies for every package would be quite complicated!
[22:50] <asac> all this will hopefully change sooner or later when we can connect bugs directly ;)
[22:50] <micahg> indeed
[22:53] <micahg> bdmurray: is there an easy way for me to make graphs like the one you make for the hugdays?
[22:57] <bdmurray> micahg: the graphs are not an easy process.  what are you interested in?
[22:57] <micahg> oh, just something similar for firefox, if it's not easy, don't worry, I was just wondering if it's something I can make
[22:59] <bdmurray> micahg: something like http://status.qa.ubuntu.com/qapkgstatus/firefox-3.0 ?
[22:59] <BUGabundo> guud evening
[22:59] <micahg> yes :)
[22:59] <micahg> can I use that for any package?
[23:00] <bdmurray> not any but a lot
[23:01]  * micahg likes to see progress of triaging :)
[23:17] <caa> bug #402639 look more like a question than a bug. I tried to recreate the bug but I only got it to work as intended, so I supplied the bug with steps to make it work. But I think it should be converted to a question, can I have a second pair of eyes on it?
[23:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 402639 in thunderbird "Get all mail add-on doesn't work on Ubuntu" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/402639
[23:28] <micahg> yeah, caa, that makes sense
[23:29] <micahg> we wouldn't be able to support it anyways as we don't package it
[23:30] <caa> ok
[23:30] <caa> Should I just convert to question and supply the stock answer?
[23:30] <micahg> well, you already responded
[23:31] <micahg> so, I'd say if user answers that it's fixed, use stock config change invalidate response
[23:31] <caa> Ok, I'll wait and see if the responds
[23:31] <caa> thanks
[23:31] <micahg> if it's going to be a lot of back and forth then convert to Q with stock reply and you can keep following up if you want
[23:32] <caa> err, meant he insted of the :)