[00:21] <brunogirin> Hi, I confirmed bug 446632 recently but I'm not sure how to take it forward so if someone could have a look and advise what the next step should be, that would be much appreciated
[00:21] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 446632 in blender "blender-bin crashed with SIGSEGV in GPU_state_init()" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/446632
[01:20] <FFEMTcJ> hggdh: or anyone else.. I have something that should probably be wishlist, and I want to figure out if it would be something that we could get from debian the next time we sync.. Would someone be willing to talk me through it please? bug 482871
[01:20] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 482871 in libmpcdec "Please Update" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/482871
[01:23] <micahg> FFEMTcJ: it's not in debian
[01:23] <FFEMTcJ> would you walk me through how to check that please? I assume there is something similar to ubuntu packages that you looked at?
[01:24] <micahg> FFEMTcJ: install devscripts if you don't have it
[01:24] <FFEMTcJ> got it
[01:24] <micahg> the command is rmadison PKGNAME for ubuntu and rmadison -u debian PKGNAME for debian
[01:25] <micahg> I wishlisted it for you
[01:25] <micahg> you might want to change the title to include the version
[01:26] <micahg> FFEMTcJ: we generally don't touch packaging requests though except to flag as wishlist
[01:26] <micahg> the status shoudl remain new until someone does soemthing with it
[01:26] <FFEMTcJ> ok..
[01:26] <mrand> funny part is that 1.2.6 is actually old.
[01:26] <FFEMTcJ> now how about if it is something that we sync from debian?
[01:26] <mrand> http://www.musepack.net/index.php?pg=src
[01:27] <mrand> It's been out for 2.5 years and was replaced 6 months ago with Musepack SV8 libs & tools (r435)
[01:28] <micahg> FFEMTcJ: then we especially don't touch it :)
[01:29] <mrand> my feeling too.
[01:31] <FFEMTcJ> ok
[07:01] <fcuk112> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xdg-user-dirs/+bug/381490 does the patch look ok? how do i know if a package should be sponsored by main or universe?
[07:01] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 381490 in xdg-user-dirs "xdg-user-dirs has no man pages; URL in README is incorrect" [Medium,Confirmed]
[07:18] <micahg> fcuk112: the place to ask about patches is in #ubuntu-motu, we just do triage in here
[07:19] <fcuk112> micahg: ok thanks.
[11:00] <FFEMTcJ> should wishlist be removed if somethings invalid?
[11:06] <_Narc_> hggdh: Hello, it's me again, sorry. Could you tell me how do I uninstall the -15 proposed kernel updates you told me to test yesterday, and go back to -14 (besides booting on it on grub)
[11:09] <FFEMTcJ> could someone please wishlist 483001
[11:09] <FFEMTcJ> bug 483001
[11:09] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 483001 in ubuntu "[needs-packaging] Wayland" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/483001
[11:50] <yofel_> _Narc_: disable the proposed repository, remove the -15 packages and downgrade the meta packages
[11:50] <yofel_> or just set grub to always boot -14
[11:52] <_Narc_> yofel_: oh, thank you, I was googling desperately. I already disabled proposed, but how to know exactly which packages to remove, I checked in the history but they're mixed up with "normal" updates.
[12:51] <mrand> FFEMTcJ: If the bug were to become valid again somehow, would it likely be a wishlist item?  If so, it is ok to leave it as invalid + wishlist.   No need to clear the wishlist aspect.  (BTW, 483001 done)
[12:56] <_Narc_> bug 478473
[12:56] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 478473 in linux "Unsupported FM and Analog TV card Avermedia Super 007" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/478473
[14:08] <qense> Where on earth can I find the toggle for making bugs public?
[14:08] <qense> The LP devs sure did a good job hiding it.
[14:09] <dtchen_> which bug?
[14:09] <m4rtin> top right hand corner
[14:09] <qense> dtchen_: any bug m4rtin: I can't find it there.
[14:10] <m4rtin> qense: where it says "This report is public" I see a little yellow edit circle next to it - click that
[14:10] <qense> I don't see the edit icon there.
[14:10] <qense> That's weird
[14:11] <m4rtin> I can definitely see it on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bash-completion/+bug/449349
[14:11] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 449349 in bash-completion "regression for completing remote files/dirs over ssh" [Medium,Confirmed]
[14:11] <m4rtin> are you logged in?
[14:11] <qense> I am logged in, I am a LP beta tester and a member of ubuntu-bugcontrol
[14:11] <qense> but I can't see the edit button
[14:13] <m4rtin> weird
[14:13] <qense> yep
[14:13] <m4rtin> well, sorry, I can't say further than that
[14:13] <qense> no point, thanks for your help anyway
[14:13] <m4rtin> np
[14:14] <dtchen_> JS enabled, correct?
[14:14] <dtchen_> on edge, the icon is to the right of the text
[14:15] <qense> I'm using Chromium, maybe that's what causes this.
[14:15] <qense> yes
[14:15] <qense> it does show up in FF
[14:15] <kklimonda> qense: it is
[14:15] <kklimonda> there is even bug reported
[14:15] <qense> ah
[14:18] <zorael> If I have a bug very likely caused by the same kernel behavior as causes LP #415023, should I post about it as a comment or create a new bug report and mark it as a duplicate? I have a small video clip describing it I want to attach, and I'm not sure where I should put it.
[14:18] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 415023 in hal-info "brightness is broken on MSI WIND U100" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/415023
[14:19] <dtchen_> zorael: create a dupe
[14:19] <dtchen_> zorael: we'll undupe as appropriate
[14:23] <zorael> dtchen_: It is essentially about both the kernel and the hardware generating brightness up/down keypresses, causing them to trigger eachother and race. My bug is that when the screen tries to dpms off/suspend/standby, it also generates three keypresses, simulating activity and instantly wakes the screen. What package should I file that against? It's technically not hal-info, as the other bug has been ascribed to. More of either a
[14:23] <zorael> kernel issue, or with the "xsync extension" which in this case would need to ignore brightness key events when monitoring for activity.
[14:24] <dtchen_> zorael: it affects linux. start there.
[14:38] <amit_sharma> dtchen_, hi..this is abt bug 477154
[14:38] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 477154 in alsa-driver "When headphones are plugged in, the speaker does not get muted automatically." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/477154
[14:39] <amit_sharma> i tried the last action items....but it seems once reboot happens no changes remained saved in config files....
[14:51] <dtchen_> amit_sharma: values echoes to sysfs do not persist across a reboot
[14:52] <dtchen_> amit_sharma: also, I don't have time right this moment to look, but did the actual hint do anything after a reconfig?
[14:55] <amit_sharma> dtchen_, i rebooted system once echoed hint...didn
[14:55] <amit_sharma> did not tested before reboot
[14:56] <amit_sharma> dtchen_,thanks for helping..once u have time...just have a look at the output u asked for.....
[15:15] <_Narc_> dtchen: I just saw this in my syslog, thought maybe it could help you. http://paste.ubuntu.com/319334/
[15:15] <dtchen_> _Narc_: we already know that HDA is crap
[15:16] <dtchen_> _Narc_: it's a red herring; don't pay attention to it
[15:16] <_Narc_> dtchen_: Haha, okay, sorry
[15:37] <kklimonda> dtchen_: so if hda is crap what is the good, cheap sound card right now?
[15:38] <dtchen_> kklimonda: anything not HDA?
[15:41] <dtchen_> DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.05
[15:41] <dtchen_> ^^^^ huh?
[15:42] <dtchen_> (bug 483114)
[15:42] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 483114 in pulseaudio "Pulse volume control does not manage ALSA master volume" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/483114
[17:17] <hggdh> prophetic?
[17:18] <nigel_nb> hey hggdh
[17:18] <nigel_nb> is it normal practice for errors in ubuntu documentation to be logged as bugs?
[17:19] <hggdh> nigel_nb: yes they are bugs
[17:19] <hggdh> hi nigel_nb
[17:19] <hggdh> :-)
[17:19] <nigel_nb> :)
[17:24] <qense> What thing is responsible for making Nautilus flag a device as bearing music?
[17:25] <qense> I've got a bug where that happened when the device didn't have any music capabilities.
[17:29] <nigel_nb> hggdh: this is bug 483149
[17:29] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 483149 in ubuntu-docs "Type cmd.exe in run is bad pratice" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/483149
[17:30] <mr_steve> qense, I think it's Nautilus itself.
[17:33] <qense> ok, thanks. I'll have a look at that
[17:35] <mr_steve> Has anyone noticed a lot of bugs being filed against Firefox, which aren't Firefox bugs? I think people are getting confused. Probably hitting the first "Report a problem" menuitem they see..
[17:36]  * yofel thinks that too
[17:36] <yofel> there are a lot of bugs reported against yelp
[17:36] <mr_steve> Maybe the menuitem should be "Report a problem with <APPNAME>"
[17:39] <mr_steve> I'm thinking about filing a bug, but I'm not sure what package to file against. Or maybe it should be on brainstorm? Dunno.
[18:07] <Tiibiidii> either way i think it's a bug: it makes the users prefer to wait for it to be fixed (hence disregarding important security updates), or it's indeed a problem, and so it shouldn't happen so often
[18:07] <Tiibiidii> but i'm not sure on what the problem is
[18:18] <dtchen_> Tiibiidii: what's the context? I'm missing everything prior to 13:04 (14 minutes ago)
[18:19] <Tiibiidii> uh
[18:19] <Tiibiidii> i'll type it again
[18:19] <dtchen_> thank you
[18:20] <Tiibiidii>  one question: since karmic beta, i noticed that upgrade manager offers partial upgrades (i read on the forums that these shouldn't be done, so i obviously never did)... those never happened through previous ubuntu betas, but i didn't bother...
[18:20] <Tiibiidii> but now i saw these partial upgrades even while karmic's stable (and not only on my computer!)
[18:20] <Tiibiidii> i read that it may happen if some packages aren't uploaded fine... but whatever it's the reason, by "apt-get updat"ing one or two days later its said that it should be fixed
[18:20] <Tiibiidii> so i'm wondering... is this partial upgrades thing a cautious warning that was simply added to avoid eventual problems (so the partial upgrades were happening even before but they weren't notified), or is it a problem of the karmic repositories/regression in apt? (right now i haven't upgraded from some days... and it's proposing 96 updates, but i'm refraining to do this because of the partial update warning)
[18:20] <Tiibiidii> either way i think it's a bug: it makes the users prefer to wait for it to be fixed (hence disregarding important security updates), or it's indeed a problem, and so it shouldn't happen so often
[18:20] <Tiibiidii> but i'm not sure on what the problem is
[18:21] <dtchen_> Tiibiidii: do you have the Pre-release updates option checked in System > Administration > Software Sources ?
[18:21] <dtchen_> (aka karmic-proposed)
[18:22] <Tiibiidii> no
[18:23] <Tiibiidii> nor proposed, nor backports (before changing my laptop, aka before 9.04 i was actually used to activate even backports... and even then i didn't ever saw any of those partial upgrades warning)
[18:24] <dtchen_> it's unlikely to be an error repository-/pocket-side
[18:24] <Tiibiidii> but i have some ppa active if it's important
[18:24] <dtchen_> ...
[18:24] <dtchen_> yes, that's important.
[18:24] <dtchen_> Disable the PPAs first, then update again
[18:25] <Tiibiidii> (virtualbox, opera, chromium-daily, and medibuntu)
[18:26] <Tiibiidii> hovewer the problematic packages aren't the ones from the ppas...
[18:26] <Tiibiidii> (now i'll try disabling the ppa/external repositories)
[18:26] <dtchen_> yes, then pastebin the output from aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade
[18:34] <Tiibiidii> ok: found the problem (maybe update-manager could have suggested this)... removing eclipse-platform-dbgsym solved the issue (i installed that for an eclipse bug report)
[18:40] <Tiibiidii> ok, tried reinstalling the dbgsym... and indeed update-manager (by accepting the partial-upgrade) proposes to remove the dbgsym... thank you dtchen (however i wonder what was the problem with the partial upgrade on that other computer)
[18:51] <WeatherGod> I have a suggestion about the roadmap idea mentioned yesterday
[18:52] <WeatherGod> maybe it is already done, but I think we should have co-operation with the testing groups to let them know of the most common issues to look for before a release
[18:53] <WeatherGod> maybe have something like "HugDays" where we look to see if certain problems exists in a beta
[18:54] <WeatherGod> we could call it "RugDays"... (looking for bugs in the rug)
[18:56] <WeatherGod> **cricket, cricket**
[19:18] <qense> WeatherGod: good cooperation with the testing team is indeed a good point
[19:18] <karl_> Is there anyone here that can pass along information upstream to someone who cares about booting into Ubutu instal cds?
[19:19] <dtchen_> karl_: probably. What's the issue?
[19:19] <karl_> Well in Karmic final there was a bug that affected many of our Foundations computers.
[19:20] <karl_> The problem has been fixed, but I would like to pass some information on upstream.  Is that possible?
[19:20] <WeatherGod> qense, mind helping me out with a update-manager problem?
[19:21] <WeatherGod> found it in two reports already
[19:21] <qense> ok
[19:21] <qense> what's the problem?
[19:21] <dtchen_> karl_: in the installer? Check #ubuntu-installer.
[19:22] <WeatherGod> qense, look at bug 481846
[19:22] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 481846 in update-manager "update manager crashes" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/481846
[19:22] <karl_> Ok I will but I feel that I am being passed around from group to group.  Thank you for your help.
[19:22] <WeatherGod> I suggested the same fix for another person, but they reported that it didn't work
[19:23] <WeatherGod> qense, the screenshot in that report gives much more info
[19:25] <WeatherGod> btw, can anyone suggest a good tab manager plugin/addon for firefox
[19:25] <WeatherGod> since starting triaging, I have been using tabs much more than I am used to
[19:26] <qense> the problem with this is that the parts of the software you're reporting the bug against has to be up-to-date
[19:27] <qense> That isn't the case here, because the updater doesn't work.
[19:27] <yofel> WeatherGod: if you don't want to risk  loosing them on crash you could try session manager
[19:27] <qense> FF should remember them by default on crashes
[19:27]  * yofel is using more tabs than he can handle too ^^
[19:27] <WeatherGod> it isn't crashes I am worried about, it is just having so many tabs
[19:27] <WeatherGod> and such a small screen
[19:28] <WeatherGod> qense, why won't the updater work?
[19:28] <qense> if the traces are good enough you can confirm the bugs and let the developers handle it
[19:28] <qense> maybe opening a task for the Update Manager project as well
[19:28] <qense> so the developers see it
[19:29] <WeatherGod> so it might not be a package issue?
[19:29] <qense> well, it crashes
[19:29] <qense> What made you think it was a package issue? Maybe I forgot a clue.
[19:30] <WeatherGod> well, the error message says that certain packages must be *upgraded* before the update
[19:30] <qense> that is just how apport is designed
[19:30] <qense> you can't report a bug against an old package
[19:30] <WeatherGod> and I think both reporters had upgraded from 9.04
[19:30] <qense> because it may have been solved in the newer package
[19:31] <WeatherGod> that's silly, because only the upgrade manager could possibly know that a package is outdated
[19:31] <WeatherGod> why would there be such a restriction?
[19:31] <qense> the update-manager is just a front-end for the package system
[19:32] <qense> everyone can read the files and look if there is a newer version online
[19:32] <qense> however, it is a problem because now we don't ahve the trace
[19:33] <qense> although if I'm correct that's already a bug against apport
[19:33] <WeatherGod> anyway, maybe I should have them try updating using synaptic
[19:34] <qense> you could try that
[19:34] <WeatherGod> it would at least help determine where the bug lies
[19:34] <qense> and afterwards let them report the bug again with the .crash file in /var/crash
[19:34] <WeatherGod> yeah
[19:35] <WeatherGod> I'll first see if synaptic gets the job done.  If not, then try the command line
[19:35] <WeatherGod> then go back to seeing what happened to the update manager
[19:36] <qense> sounds good
[19:36] <WeatherGod> thanks for the help
[19:36] <qense> yw
[19:39] <WeatherGod> just noticed something... synaptic uses the word "Upgrade" when it should use "Update"
[19:39] <qense> is there a clear definition for that?
[19:39] <WeatherGod> I think using the terms interchangably might confuse users
[19:40] <qense> that's probably true
[19:40] <yofel> tell that to apt-get ...
[19:40] <WeatherGod> well, one of the bug reports was confused by it
[19:40] <WeatherGod> I always thought there was a clear definition
[19:42] <qense> maybe we have/should
[19:42] <jtniehof> I think there are two clear definitions....
[19:42] <WeatherGod> yeah, I always envisioned upgrade as being between major releases, while update being for minor releases
[19:42] <jtniehof> I can't imagine the thought process that went into the apt commands: "Okay, update, that's obvious, then there's upgrade...good, good...so the next thing should be...er...I already used upgrade....dist-upgrade!"
[19:42] <WeatherGod> heh
[19:43] <WeatherGod> I come from using yum, so it wasn't very complicated
[19:43] <yofel> well, apt-get is designed for debian where those definitions actually make sense
[19:43] <yofel> in ubuntu it indeed is somewhat confusing
[19:44] <WeatherGod> and then you have ArchLinux, I think, that always does rolling updates
[19:45] <micahg> I think it's update the cache and upgrade packages
[19:45] <jtniehof> arch: for when gentoo is too easy :)
[19:46] <WeatherGod> heh
[19:47] <WeatherGod> so, we can't agree on a definition of the two terms?
[19:47] <yofel> WeatherGod: well, you'll probably fail trying to rewrite apt, but maybe someone could make a GUI specifiaction
[19:48] <yofel> *specification
[19:49] <jtniehof> I think synaptic's consistent with apt, it's just the Ubuntu update-manager that's different
[19:50] <WeatherGod> possibly, which is ok, so long as the distinction is clear
[19:51] <yofel> I think so too, but since a normal user won't use apt-get but rather update-manager and synaptic maybe those too should use the same definitions
[19:51] <WeatherGod> most users who will be confused by that won't regularlly use synaptic
[19:52] <WeatherGod> I think the Software-Center and Update Manager should be written under that specificiation
[19:52] <WeatherGod> those are going to be the applications that the users will regularly see
[19:53] <WeatherGod> synaptic is going to become one of those tools that act as a backup
[20:26] <mr_steve> Is there anyone who could have a look at #483159? I believe there's enough info to mark it triaged.
[20:27] <mr_steve> bug #483159
[20:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 483159 in libpam-mount "pam_mount trying to unmount my auto-mounted encrypted partitions every hour via CRON" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/483159
[20:32] <WeatherGod> mr_steve, I would say that it has enough info to be actionable... however I can't mark things as triaged
[20:33] <mr_steve> Nice to have a 2nd opinion anyway. I just thought I'd throw it out there for someone from bugcontrol to notice later
[20:34]  * micahg is  looking at the upstream report now
[20:39] <micahg> hmmm
[20:40] <micahg> I guess there's enough here
[20:40] <micahg> mr_steve: what importance do you think it should be set at?
[20:42] <mr_steve> I'm not sure, probably medium, since it's not causing data loss, but definitely obnoxious. Unmounting filesystems at random and such.
[20:43] <micahg> mr_steve: agreed, marking Medium -> Triaged
[20:43] <mr_steve> awesome, thanks
[20:45] <micahg> mr_steve: done
[20:45] <micahg> thanks for Triaging!
[20:46] <mr_steve> I think I'm going to try to apply for bugcontrol soon. I like triage, and it's good practice for the helpdesk job I'll inevitably have after college
[20:46] <micahg> indeed, well, keep up the good work
[20:48] <dtchen_> is there a Dominic Stadler present?
[20:50] <dtchen_> sigh.
[21:03] <WeatherGod> did X11 change in Karmic?
[21:03] <WeatherGod> just found a bug report here, and the person doesn't have a xorg.conf file
[21:04] <dtchen_> /etc/X11/xorg.conf hasn't been created since 9.04 at least
[21:04] <maxb> It is no longer required to have one.
[21:04] <WeatherGod> ah, ok, didn't know that
[21:04] <WeatherGod> my Jaunty has one
[21:04] <WeatherGod> go figure
[21:04] <dtchen_> as does mine, because I use Nvidia
[21:05] <dtchen_> (not to mention my adding other options)
[21:05] <WeatherGod> I have an EeePC, and I don't remember needing to do modifications
[21:05] <WeatherGod> except maybe speed and other sensitivity things through the GUI
[21:05] <dtchen_> in a more ideal world, you wouldn't need one at all
[21:06] <WeatherGod> but, how is xorg handling the information now?
[21:06] <WeatherGod> defaults?
[21:06] <dtchen_> yes, thanks to evdev
[21:06] <WeatherGod> ah
[21:06] <WeatherGod> haven't read up on that
[21:06] <dtchen_> well, hal to be more precise
[21:07] <mr_steve> Autoconfiguration. I've found it useful to run X -configure to generate an xorg.conf, which should be the same as the autoconfig X is using
[21:07] <dtchen_> hal > udev, really
[21:07] <WeatherGod> but, I thought hal is being deprecated?
[21:07] <dtchen_> see above
[21:07] <WeatherGod> ok, must be getting it all backwards
[21:08] <WeatherGod> so, hal will replace udev and will work with devicekit?
[21:08] <dtchen_> other way around
[21:08] <dtchen_> everything is being migrated toward udev with *kit-specific bits for now
[21:08] <dtchen_> there's a halsectomy page on the Ubuntu wiki
[21:09] <WeatherGod> halsectomy?
[21:09] <dtchen_> wiki/Halsectomy
[21:09] <WeatherGod> yeah, found it... just a funny word
[21:10] <dtchen_> what's a migration without pain^Whumour?
[21:11] <dtchen_> in other news, bug descriptions consisting of "waht" make me sad.
[21:11] <WeatherGod> remember, migration is very similar to migranes
[21:12] <WeatherGod> or "I don't know, it just came up"
[21:12] <mr_steve> WeatherGod, I've seen a ton of those
[21:12] <mr_steve> Especially for kernel oops'
[21:13] <WeatherGod> yeah, something needs to be done about those
[21:13] <WeatherGod> most users have no freaking clue what to do, but at least they might feel better that the computer took care of it themselves
[21:14] <mr_steve> I thought the default for oops's was to use the first line of oopstext as the title, I think people are changing it before submitting
[21:14] <mr_steve> I usually just change 'em to the oops message
[21:15] <WeatherGod> good idea
[21:15] <mr_steve> It's much easier to find possible dupes that way, too
[21:16] <WeatherGod> interesting bug report... bug 482906
[21:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 482906 in ubuntu "RockRidge format causes invalid ISOs (truncated filenames) when burned/read from Windows" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/482906
[21:17] <WeatherGod> no way for me to confirm it, though
[21:24] <micahg> WeatherGod: mr_steve: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingKernelOops
[21:28] <mr_steve> Indeed. Apport/kerneloops seem pretty good about sending the appropriate info. It seems the main thing to do is ask the basic "what were you doing, what happens when you do it again?" questions
[21:28] <mr_steve> If that info isn't already in the report
[21:33] <phenom> Ok, another issue after upgrading to Karmic: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8323583#post8323583
[21:34] <phenom> When switching to a virtual terminal, the screen flashes, and I get the cursor effect described in that post.
[21:43] <bcurtiswx> is there a tag for bugs with workarounds in them?
[21:44] <dtchen_> "spam"?
[21:44] <bcurtiswx> thanks dan.....
[23:40] <bcurtiswx> I Wish all those going to UDS the best!!