[00:56] <scream> Five minutes remain on the board elections.
[00:57] <scream> ignore that, sorry
[05:04] <scream> How long does a bug like https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sun-java6/+bug/410297
[05:04] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 410297 in sun-java6 "Sync sun-java6 6-15-1 (multiverse) from Debian unstable (non-free)" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[05:04] <scream> take to process?
[05:06] <hggdh> not long, usually. Of course, in this case, it might help if it had been marked as a security issue
[05:10] <scream> hggdh, I don't see the option to mark it as a security issue.
[05:10] <scream> It would be very important to me that this security fix make it into the repo.
[05:13] <hggdh> scream, click on "update description/tags" you will have the option on the list at the right side. Added bonus if the CVEs are also linked ;-)
[05:14] <scream> The security vulnerability causes a remote code execution exploit.  I don't know who to tell to get this fixed.  It is important that it be addressed I think.
[05:14] <scream> Ok, I'll do what I can, but I'm a bit inexperienced.
[05:15] <hggdh> no prob. The reporter is very active on Ubuntu, so I would not be worried much. You can also expose the issue at #ubuntu-hardened
[06:07] <thekorn> good morning bugsquad
[06:52] <dholbach> good morning
[08:59] <e-jat> can some one look into bug 411772
[08:59] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 411772 in cheese "Broken Upgrade in Karmic for cheese 2.27.90-0ubuntu1 (dup-of: 411748)" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/411772
[08:59] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 411748 in cheese "package cheese 2.27.90-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/411748
[09:00] <e-jat> owh ok
[09:00] <seb128> e-jat, the fix has already been uploaded, you need to wait on build
[09:02] <e-jat> ok thanks ..
[09:03] <e-jat> ill do the manual fix 1st ..
[13:41] <alourie|work> hello
[13:46] <alourie|work> I need an advice regarding bug #411912
[13:46] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 411912 in file-roller "7-zip SFX created under windows can not be open or extract by file roller" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/411912
[14:28] <dwg> Grr
[14:28] <dwg> how do I get my PPA to rebuild for Karmic
[14:38] <Ampelbein> dwg: can you elaborate? normally, you'd point the distribution field in debian/changelog to whatever release you are building for.
[14:39] <dwg> Ampelbein:  yeah, I think I'm part way to figuring it out
[14:39] <dwg> Ampelbein:  It's been long enough since I made the packages, I've forgotten which step of the build/pbuild/upload process you specify the distro series in
[14:47] <hggdh> alourie|work, I reopened bug 411912 -- the request sounds valid, for me
[14:47] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 411912 in file-roller "7-zip SFX created under windows can not be open or extract by file roller" [Low,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/411912
[14:52] <alourie|work> hggdh: can you please explain? It does sound like a wishlist though, not a behavior to expect by default....
[14:53] <maxb> Hmm. Apport has retraced bug 411734, marked it public, and then marked it duplicate of bug 410570, which is still private
[14:53] <maxb> This is unhelpful
[14:53] <ubot4> maxb: Bug 411734 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/411734 is private
[14:53] <ubot4> maxb: Bug 410570 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/410570 is private
[14:54] <maxb> ubot4: You lie on the first one
[14:54] <ubot4> maxb: Error: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :)
[14:54] <seb128> maxb, retracers don't mark things public
[14:55] <maxb> seb128: launchpad disagrees with you
[14:55] <maxb>  Apport retracing service  2 hours ago
[14:55] <maxb> visibility: 	private → public
[14:55] <seb128> maxb, will it marked it as duplicate rather
[14:55] <seb128> duplicates are cleaned and opened
[14:57] <maxb> It's annoying, especially when the so-called cleaning doesn't actually prevent people downloading the coredumps
[14:59] <hggdh> alourie|work, a 7z-auto-extractable file is a 7z archive with the extractor code wrapped around. This should be seen as an archive, on Linux
[15:00] <alourie|work> hggdh: thanks, I saw your comment on the bug page. Can I help here with upstream?
[15:01] <hggdh> maxb, this is an ongoing work. I was writing a stacktrace cleaner to see if we can clean it of private data and have apport mark a reprocessed bug public
[15:01] <maxb> Your first obstacle is that launchpad doesn't support permanently removing attachments
[15:03] <hggdh> alourie|work, yes, if you not mind: (1) look at upstream (both mailinglist and bugs) to see if this has been requested before; (2) if it is a bug, then add the upstream link on our bug;
[15:03] <hggdh> maxb, well, we do our part, and the LP devs will do theirs. I hope ;-)
[15:11] <bddebian> Boo
[15:31] <alourie|work> hggdh: I see the bug was already invalidated :-)
[17:04] <jcastro> bdmurray, wrt to your email, isn't there a way to ask launchpad that?
[17:05] <micahg> is there a bug meeting?
[17:06] <bdmurray> jcastro: I don't think so that's why I asked you
[17:07] <jcastro> ok well I'm not really keeping track of every upstream who is using lp
[17:07] <jcastro> they kind of either do or they don't
[17:07] <jcastro> or they sometimes comment on certain bugs but don't necessarily follow every bug
[17:07] <bdmurray> okay, I was just looking for a rough idea of some who do
[17:07] <bdmurray> I've another way to slice that list though so will work on that
[17:08] <jcastro> I know alot who follow it, but they have their own bugzilla or whatever
[17:08] <jcastro> so they don't really "use lp" like you mean "use lp"
[17:08] <jcastro> unless that's what you mean. :p
[17:09] <bdmurray> What I mean is if we made an effort to make any of those private bug reports public would anybody look at them.
[17:10] <jcastro> I would think so, upstreams seem to like the apport traces
[17:10] <jcastro> bdmurray, try the few tomboy ones and I'll ask sandy if they are useful
[17:10] <bdmurray> jcastro: okay, great
[17:11] <jcastro> bdmurray, is it possible to make someone in a certain project be able to see the private reports without being in bug control?
[17:11] <jcastro> say and upstream for a certain project?
[17:12] <bdmurray> jcastro: no, they'd need to be in bug control at this point in time
[17:12] <jcastro> ugh
[17:12] <jcastro> I don't think many would like that
[17:12] <jcastro> when they see the form, etc.
[17:12] <bdmurray> I thought we'd said if they are an upstream dev applying via the usual way was not necessary
[17:13] <jcastro> ah, right
[17:13] <jcastro> ignore me
[17:13] <jcastro> (haven't had one do that in a long time)
[17:13] <bdmurray> maybe you could try recruiting people?
[17:13] <jcastro> ok
[17:14] <bdmurray> I saw somebody commenting on grub2 bugs who might be an upstream dev, so then check and see if there are any apport-crashes then ask them about it.  If they really are.
[17:25] <bdmurray> jcastro: okay they are public now but the stack traces don't look very good
[17:26] <jcastro> which bug numbers?
[17:26] <seb128> what is the issue discussed there?
[17:27] <bdmurray> bug 350985 and bug 359567
[17:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 350985 in tomboy "Tomboy.exe crashed with SIGSEGV in __kernel_vsyscall()" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/350985
[17:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 359567 in tomboy "Tomboy.exe crashed with SIGSEGV in __kernel_vsyscall()" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/359567
[17:28] <bdmurray> seb128: we were talking about making some private crashes public for upstreams
[17:30] <jcastro> bdmurray, yeah he's says they're not useful
[17:31] <andresmujica> bdmurray: hi i've just arrived...
[17:34] <bdmurray> andresmujica: were we supposed to have a bug squad meeting today?  I didn't see or send an announcement.
[17:37] <jcastro> bdmurray, ah, he says that he needs this implemented for that to work: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ApportMonoCrashes
[17:42] <andresmujica> bdmurray: supposedly, but i've been out of town and wasn't able to make the arrangements :(
[17:45] <andresmujica> i hope i'll end that thing by the end of august, or i'll go nuts
[17:52] <bdmurray> andresmujica: I was out of town last week also why don't we reschedule the meeting for the 18th at the same time
[17:52] <andresmujica> i believe it would be perfect. let me check.
[18:13] <andresmujica> bdmurray: ok, 18th would be good, then same time, maybe we can hold the meeting at this channel #ubuntu-bugs
[18:14] <bdmurray> that sounds good to me
[18:15] <andresmujica> ok
[18:15] <andresmujica> i'll send it right now
[18:30] <bdmurray> andresmujica: great, thanks for doing that
[19:07] <matti> ;]
[19:08] <micahg> bdmurray: wasn't there supposed to be a bug meeting today?
[19:09] <bdmurray> micahg: yes, there was supposed to be one however since no announcement was made letting people know about it we decided to postpone it until next week
[19:10] <micahg> ok, cool, I'll wait for the annoucement
[20:55] <andre___> does ubuntu 9.04 really still ship gnome-volume-manager?
[20:57] <hggdh> andre___, I am not sure, I am running 9.10. But i *think* it did. http://packages.ubuntu.com should say... hold on
[20:57] <andre___> eeks
[20:58] <andre___> people forwarding reports upstream, but g-v-m is completely unmaintained anyway
[20:58] <hggdh> andre___, yes, in the Universe repository -- meaning it is not installed by default
[20:58] <hggdh> hum
[20:59] <hggdh> and still in karmic. Hum. Perhaps... time to ask the MOTUs about dropping it
[20:59] <hggdh> andre___, did you update the entry for g-v-m to state it is orphaned?
[20:59] <andre___> nope
[21:00] <chrisccoulson> it seems g-v-m would be a good candidate for removal from the archives now
[21:00] <hggdh> just pinged MOTU about it, let's see if we get any answer
[21:00] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, yes, that's what I think
[21:01] <andre___> true
[21:01] <hggdh> andre___, will you update it? ;-) I mean marking it orphaned?
[21:01] <andre___> err where?
[21:01] <hggdh> on b.g.o... isn't there a way of doing it?
[21:01] <andre___> ah. well, you can close it for new bug entries
[21:02] <andre___> i can file a bug, don't have permissions to do it myself.
[21:02] <hggdh> and I will look at the g-v-m bugs here, and discuss what to do
[21:02] <hggdh> perhaps it would be a good idea, sending a clear sign g-v-m is not dead, but very near so
[21:03] <andre___> well, since gnome 2.26 all functionality has been replaced by using nautilus etc
[21:03] <chrisccoulson> hggdh - i think most g-v-m bugs here are just WONTFIX really - you're going to struggle to find anyone interested in fixing them
[21:03] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, I think so, also. But I do not want to go and wontfix them before talking it through :-)
[21:05] <chrisccoulson> hggdh - agreed :) i think installing g-v-m on existing systems is likely to cause more harm than benefits with the duplicated functionality now, so i definately think it should be dropped now. we're already removing quite a bit of cruft this cycle anyway
[21:05] <hggdh> ugh, g-v-m in karmic is 2.24.1 !! really, really, time to throw it away
[21:06] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, OK, I get the idea ;-)
[21:06] <hggdh> anyway, just 37 open bugs right now
[21:06] <hggdh> well, time to increase my karma, I guess
[21:07] <chrisccoulson> don't steal all the karma ;)
[21:07] <hggdh> :-D my precioussss
[21:11] <chrisccoulson> hggdh - as there's not much response on #ubuntu-motu, you could open a bug report to request removal (and subscribe ubuntu-universe-sponsors)
[21:11] <chrisccoulson> i can then ACK it and subscribe ubuntu-archive, but i'm not sure whether to discuss it with people first
[21:11] <chrisccoulson> personally, i don't think there's any point in keeping it around ;)
[21:13] <chrisccoulson> andre__ - is there any functionality in g-v-m that is not yet handled elsewhere?
[21:14] <chrisccoulson> actually
[21:14] <chrisccoulson> gnome-volume-manager still has rdepends - that would need to be resolved first
[22:05] <hggdh> bad
[22:07] <hggdh> bdmurray, ping
[22:07] <bdmurray> bad bdmurray?
[22:08] <hggdh> heh. We were discussing gnome-volume-manager a few ago. It has been orphaned on Gnome, and the current version we have on Jaunty/Karmic is 2.24.1
[22:08] <bdmurray> yes, I saw that
[22:08] <hggdh> I am considering closing all bugs on it as wontfix due to no upstream. Are you OK with that?
[22:09] <hggdh> chrisccoulson, I will open the bug, thanks
[22:09] <bdmurray> I think the package should be removed first
[22:10] <chrisccoulson> thanks hggdh - there is a bit of work resolving some of the current rdepends before it can be removed though
[22:10] <hggdh> OK. We will still have the issue with the old bugs (Jaunty, Hardy, etc).
[22:10] <bdmurray> and the bugs should also be checked to see if any are SRU worthty of course
[22:10] <chrisccoulson> i will take a look at that at some point
[22:10] <hggdh> will do. SRUs would only probably apply to Hardy, since it seems to have been orphaned at Jaunty time
[22:11] <bdmurray> I don't see how a package being orphaned automatically changes the severity of a bug and its relevancy for an SRU
[22:12] <hggdh> it does not. Its just that there is nobody available to write any new fixes. If Jaunty == Karmic, then no 9.04/9.10 code bugs will be fixed
[22:12] <bdmurray> but in the extreme case if g-v-m hosed your whole system that would be SRU worthy and somebody should fix it
[22:13] <hggdh> oh, yes, of course. And I do not lightly close bugs :-)
[22:13] <bdmurray> My main point is that each bug should be carefully evaluated before Won't Fixing it
[22:14] <hggdh> I agree
[22:14] <bdmurray> Okay cool
[22:14]  * hggdh is not looking for karma, anyway ;-)
[22:14]  * hggdh now goes back to SNMP and a really hosed MIB
[22:15] <bdmurray> Additionally when looking at them the bugs should be assumed to affect Karmic and subsequently Won't Fix'ing should only be used for Wishlist and Low type bug reports until the package is removed
[22:18] <hggdh> well, given the slow response from upstream, even when supported, I guess we can safely assume that even bugs from now unsupported versions will affect karmic
[22:18] <bdmurray> yeah, I'd agree
[22:24] <bdmurray> What's that ubuntu cyclists team?
[22:37] <bdmurray> I was thinking they'd be interested in bug 411881
[22:37] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 411881 in ubuntu "[needs-packaging] mytourbook" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/411881
[23:00] <greg-g> bdmurray: awesome. I just pasted the links in #ubuntu-cyclists
[23:00] <bdmurray> greg-g: heh, I don't realize there was an irc channel!
[23:00] <greg-g> of course! :)
[23:00] <bdmurray> didn't
[23:01] <greg-g> theres an IRC channel for everything
[23:02] <BUGabundo> ola ola
[23:03] <greg-g> and now sent to the mailing list :) we'll see if this whole "online social networking" things works :)
[23:58] <greg-g> bdmurray: http://identi.ca/notice/7958449  ;)  From Fabian R.