[01:35] Can anyone look at a debdiff I made for the upgrade Bug #206862 ?? [01:35] Launchpad bug 206862 in xsensors "New upstream version (0.60) available" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/206862 [01:38] nano4ever: it is a patch, not a debdiff [01:39] nano4ever: is there any other possible value for num? [01:40] using a switch/case there seems odd if it can only be useful for 1 [01:40] and, it's missing all the Debian infrastructure [01:40] oh sorry i'll upload it now [01:40] (as hggdh alluded to) [01:42] yeah, an if would be enough. And I, particularly, don't like a return in the middle of a switch [01:42] hggdh: alright it's uploaded [01:47] nano4ever: why are you patching the autoconf files? [01:48] in other words, is 0.61 the new upstream release? [01:51] ooooh, we are still at 0.50 in Lucid [01:51] well the patch is from here https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-motu/2008-September/004711.html [01:51] the author posted the patch but with no official change in version number [01:52] thank you [01:52] I contacted him and he said that he would post some updates to xsensors but he hasn't done it yet... [01:53] it would probably be a better idea to propose a new source upstream version, instead of patch 0.50 to 0.60 to 0.61 [01:53] the debdiff is rather big as a result [01:53] ah ok [01:54] so what's the process for making such a proposal? [01:54] and -- usually -- running autoconf on package build is not viewed as a good option (I do not really know if it is run, or if the patches for the autoconf are just for completeness) [01:55] nano4ever: you could download the new upstream and add your patches there [01:55] this would make the debdiff much smaller, and there is no sense in carrying such a large patch if the new upstream code has it all there (except for your patch) [01:56] i just followed the directions here for the update .. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete#Updating an Ubuntu Package [01:56] so are you saying that I should make a new package from upstream, then apply the author's patch as an update? [01:57] yes [01:57] you would have to download the source from upstream (hopefully they have a distribution tarball) [01:58] because this would make life much more simpler [01:58] this is, in fact, what the instructions you pointed try to say [01:58] "Get the new source. Usually you would look up where the old version was downloaded from (check debian/copyright) and use that source. But again, since this is a prepared example: [01:59] so we would upgrade from version 0.50 to 0.6x (whatever it is), plus the additional patch(es) [01:59] but the *base* version would be 0.6x [02:00] nano4ever: BTW -- thank you for working on this. I understand you may be a bit frustrated now, though [02:00] nano4ever: did I explain it OK? [02:01] i'm just a bit confused. I did start on the link i gave then I skipped to "Creating a debdiff" [02:01] I dled the the newsource [02:02] you were on the right track, up to diff-ing from 0.50 to 0.60 to 0.61 to you patch [02:02] this is where you took a, er, misguided turn [02:03] so if I just follow the "Updating an Ubuntu Package" section and upload the dsc file, that should be enough? [02:03] basically, we are -- right now -- at 0.50 (perhaps plus some patches). The new upstream is at 0.6x. So -- we upgrade the *whole* package to 0.6x [02:03] which is to say, we download 0.6x, and base a new package version on it [02:04] you would need the dsc plus (most probably) a diff [02:04] because you will (at least) have to update the ./debian/* files [02:05] would the diff be from 0.50 to 0.60? [02:05] no. The diff would be from the *current* released upstream [02:05] plustd whatever patches necessary [02:05] 0.50 is dead [02:06] ok, so what I'm thinking is copy over the .50 debian directory to .60, update those files, then make a .dsc and diff from the new .60 and .60.orig , is that about right? [02:07] and then after .60 is approved, patch to 0.60-0ubuntu2 with the coretemp patch.. [02:07] in this case, it is pretty much a *new* version, so there is no debdiff -- you will be uploading a new .orig, plus the debian packaging pieces [02:08] hggdh: I'm going to get that ppa wiki done today :) [02:09] for the last question: this, I am not sure. I personally would try to put it all together in one go, but MOTU may want different [02:10] nano4ever: also, the best channel for packaging Universe is the #ubuntu-motu one [02:10] nigel_nb: cool, thanks [02:11] nano4ever: also, please remember the package should be built for Lucid, not Karmic [02:11] hggdh: alright thanks for the tips! also, I tried #ubuntu-motu,but got no response.. [02:12] nano4ever: heh. Ask, and fill yourself of patience ;-) [02:12] they may delay to answer, but usually they do. Also, this is Friday night/Saturday morning on most places [02:13] ah makes sense [02:13] nano4ever: again, thank you for your work on this. We *do* appreciate [02:15] thanks for the thanks :P [02:15] just trying to give back [02:15] nano4ever: just one more point: we usually try very hard to use the upstream distro tarball without changes *in* it, and addtional patches separate in ./debian/patches [02:15] any patches we carry create a 'delta' from upstream (i.e., a local difference). We try to maintain this delta to a minimum [02:16] gotcha, i'll keep it that in mind [02:16] nano4ever: this is how I started in Ubuntu ;-) giving back what I was taking [02:21] dtchen: welcome back as an official developer :-) [02:29] hggdh: how do I know if a bug is part of publically announced testing initiative of an ubuntu team? [02:31] well, if it was publicly announced... [02:31] bug #? [02:35] hggdh: making the wiki edits [02:35] or creation [02:35] oh, OK [02:37] then -- we (as triagers) would have to receive a notice. This is actually a good question... perhaps we need a common place for all officially endorsed test packages as noted in [02:37] yea a wiki [02:38] I can offer to main a static list, if I'm able to get the announcements [02:41] this is something to be formalised, I agree [02:42] part of the agenda for the next meeting then [02:43] yes -- and it will have to be discussed with the other groups [02:43] meanwhile, we might go on, and assume it will be there [02:44] yep, including the devs and motu is my best guess [02:45] yes [02:45] are there any such programs now? [02:45] that have called for testing? [02:52] hggdh: wifi manager in gnome is which package? gnome-net-tools? [02:53] gnome-nettools (spelled wrong earlier) [02:55] I do not know (yet). What is the name of the file? [02:55] file? [02:56] the entire bug report consists of "The network manager is unable to connect to hidden wireless network." [02:56] I need to change the package and ask for more info [02:56] oh [02:56] network-manager [02:57] and network-manager-gnome [02:58] but it is probably network-manager that cannot find the AP [02:59] okay, thank you :) === asac_ is now known as asac === asac_ is now known as asac === etali1 is now known as etali === etali1 is now known as etali === mac_v_ is now known as mac_v === etali1 is now known as etali [16:05] !info pidgin [16:05] nperry: pidgin (source: pidgin): graphical multi-protocol instant messaging client for X. In component main, is optional. Version 1:2.6.2-1ubuntu7 (karmic), package size 562 kB, installed size 1784 kB [16:05] packages.ubuntu.com is down hrrrm [16:19] sometimes it happens. It is, IIRC, a volunteer service === yoasif_ is now known as yoasif === mac_v_ is now known as mac_v === etali1 is now known as etali [18:55] I just started having this problem for the first time: My computer is booting up into low graphics mode and I cannot change visual effects to normal or extra [18:55] Is this a bug? If so, how to report it properly [18:57] Yos, this channel is for people who are triaging bugs, rather than for support. You'd probably get a quicker response regarding solving your problem in the #ubuntu channel [18:58] If you want to report it as a bug, you can find help at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs [18:58] Ok, thanks [18:59] I hope you manage to get it sorted! === _stink__ is now known as _stink_ [19:53] Can bugs in evolution be upstreamed? [19:54] awardle: yes, it has to be upstreamed *if* it is upstream [19:54] where to [19:54] and, for Evolution, they should [19:54] http://bugzilla.gnome.org [19:55] hggdh: upstream gnome down for you? [19:55] I've been trying for some time [19:55] will check [19:55] hum [19:55] not looking good [19:56] bugzilla.gnome.org seems to be down [19:56] unfortunately, true :( [19:57] yes. I just asked about it on their bug channel [19:57] now we wait, Saturday and all of that [19:57] yea, plus holiday season [19:58] Could someone set bug 495936 to low [19:58] Launchpad bug 495936 in evolution "Feature request: better indication of signed and/or encrypted email" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/495936 [19:58] Right my first request for this evening, time to eat my tea [20:00] awardle: I actually marked it WishList. Thank you [20:01] nperry: you *eat* tea? [20:01] nperry: was about to ask, but hggdh already asked [20:02] just curious. Different people, different mores, etc [20:02] probably eating the tea cup too? [20:04] tea in England can also mean dinner [20:04] awardle: dinner or supper? [20:04] ah [20:04] hggdh: tea aka dinner [20:05] early dinner then [20:05] its 8pm [20:05] well, my grandmother-in-law used to ask us if we wanted a lemonade of coke, or orange, or whatever [20:05] so late really [20:06] indeed. teatime is gone [20:06] brb. Lunch time at my TZ. [20:17] Wow that was nice back to my learning to triage :) [20:39] nperry: just ask on any doubt, and we will try to answer [20:41] OK. bugzilla.gnome.org is down for the weekend (I *should* have read the annoucement...) [20:46] for all, courtesy of the extremely nice bugmeister for gnme: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.devel.announce/67 [20:47] oh great, I was hoping to work on the git.gnome this weekend, so thats gone now [20:47] :-) [21:01] hggdh: This evening theres alot of bugs from email, for packages syncs for example 495994 - the right people have been subscribed, do we need to confirm or marked as triaged? [21:01] bug 495994 ** [21:01] Launchpad bug 495994 in libhamcrest-java "Sync libhamcrest-java 1.1-4 (main) from Debian testing (main)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/495994 [21:02] looking. But usually, workflow request (sync/merge, and others) are outside triaging scope [21:03] in this case, even more due to the OR -- he knows what has to be done [21:03] so, no, do not touch them [21:03] Ok, just had to double check if New was the right status [21:04] Thanks :) [21:04] welcome [21:05] hggdh: frustrating to triage today with no upstream :( === yofel_ is now known as yofel [21:06] I know. But we can hope it will back earlier (this is their intention) [21:08] yea [21:09] I'm not triaging today, cant leave tasks undone, I'd rather skip 2 days and go all out from monday [21:10] Hummm debian bug tracker playing up [21:11] Ah working now :) [21:18] hggdh: fsys state-tarfile returned error exit 2 -- Could this be a bad download? [21:18] nperry: could, but give me a pastebin [21:19] bug 495992 [21:19] Launchpad bug 495992 in kdebase-runtime "package kde-icons-oxygen 4:4.2.2-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: subprocess dpkg-deb - fsys state-tarfile returned error exit 2" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/495992 [21:19] Terminallog - Never seen the error before, but just to be sure before i convert to question and solve issue === markus_ is now known as thekorn [21:21] hm, what was 'broken pipe' again? [21:21] nperry: does not sound like bad download [21:22] yofel: a subprocess had a pipe to another subprocess, and this pipe vanished (one of the subp died, in this case) [21:22] hggdh: ah yes, thx [21:26] nperry: you can check, nevertheless, by downloading the package to a temp dir, then manually running 'dpkg-deb --fsys-tarfile|tar -tv' [21:26] er [21:26] dpkg-deb --fsys-tarfile | tar -tv [21:27] meh packages.ubuntu.com is down :/ [21:28] nperry: you can drill down to the specific package from here: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kdebase-runtime [21:29] select the Overview link at the headers, and then go to the correct distro version [21:30] for example, I ended up here: https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-security/+archive/ppa/+build/1388105 [21:31] oops. Wrong drill down, the OR package is at 0ubuntu1, the one I am showing is at 0ubuntu1-1 [21:33] Thats odd, why isnt downloading OR 1-1 [21:35] no, it is, the bug title is wrong [21:36] look at the description, and at the end of the log (I also based myself on the title) [21:37] dpkg: erro processando /var/cache/apt/archives/kde-icons-oxygen_4%3a4.2.2-0ubuntu1.1_all.deb (--unpack): [21:37] hum. pt_BR, BTW [21:39] Indeed updated that, else i'll forget :) [21:40] Right the .deb seems ok [21:52] Hi [21:52] How do I search for bugs that are marked as fixed in the current development release but nominated for hardy or karmic? [21:53] Laibsch: good question, let me try to find out [21:55] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+nominations [21:55] heh, there you go [21:55] completely non-obivous, but google helps [21:56] and unfortunately, that includes yet to be fixed bugs [21:57] hggdh: I believe bug 495724 is ready to be set as triaged with importance medium [21:57] Launchpad bug 495724 in b43-fwcutter "Broadcom 4306( b43-fwcutter) Wireless can't connect to Access Points WEP/WPA/Unsecure." [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/495724 [21:57] nm_setting_802_1x_get_pkcs11_engine_path: assertion `NM_IS_SETTING_802_1X (setting)' failed - handsake doesn't seem to be happening [21:58] So I think its a network card/driver related problem - as ndiswrapper driver fixes issue [21:59] Laibsch: trying "advanced search" under +nominations should get there -- then select fix released/committed [21:59] Just did that [21:59] Got a timeout error a couple of times [21:59] but it seems to be working now [21:59] [21:59] ah, OK [22:01] who can change the status for nominations? [22:02] I think bug 129407 can be rejected as invalid for example [22:02] Launchpad bug 129407 in linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22 "r818x.ko missing in linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22-8-generic" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/129407 [22:02] Laibsch: for nominations, only the maintainers can refuse it [22:02] I see [22:03] but wait [22:03] Ubuntu has no Maintainer per se [22:03] nperry: it would be good to also have the dmesg, and a 'lspci' output [22:03] It's a team effort [22:03] Laibsch: getting there [22:04] linux *does* have maintainers [22:04] (I mean the package) [22:05] the kernel team, specifically [22:06] hggdh: Full dmesg? [22:07] nperry: yes, better more than less data === Flare183_ is now known as Flare183 [22:15] who would be capable of closing the hardy task for bug 178289? [22:15] Launchpad bug 178289 in ubuntu "Absolutely no keyboard input on fresh hardy alpha 2 installation." [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/178289 [22:15] I'm a member of "Ubuntu bugs", yet I don't seem to have the power to do it [22:18] Laibsch: I believe only Ubuntu Drivers can close that task [22:18] hggdh: Is there an upstream for b43-fwcutter [22:18] Laibsch: first of all, most of the times we see a bug against Ubuntu, this is because the OR did not know which package to set it against [22:19] ? [22:19] hggdh: Were you really talking to me? [22:19] also, bugsquad/bug-control does not have authority to close nominations [22:19] hggdh: I think pedro someone from QA team can..... [22:20] pedro, or someone else from the QA team [22:20] Laibsch: yes -- that bug was set to Ubuntu because the OR did not know where to put it (neither do I, for taht matter) [22:20] also, I reset it to INVALID, since there is no "fix" (apart from a probable bad hardware) [22:21] nigel_nb: probably [22:21] anyway, invalid is fine ;) [22:21] If it was just in livecd it would be in ubiquity but if it was there when booted it would be xorg - right? [22:22] Laibsch: nevertheless, you are pointing to a nice issue -- the forgotten nominations. Something should, clearly, be done there [22:22] nperry: it *might* be X, but the OR stated the keyboard was non-functional also during boot [22:23] so this would -- being software -- be more related to the kernel [22:23] hggdh: I thought you were talking about a logical OR (such as the one used in google searches). My abbreviation for your OR is OP. ;-) [22:23] * Laibsch has been using Usenet a lot at dial-up times [22:24] Laibsch: sorry. To be clear -- OR == Original Reporter; for me, OP == Original Poster (which, perhaps wrongly, I tend to use only on mailists) [22:24] yeah, I understood that now [22:25] Laibsch: my fault, nevertheless. I should have been less lazy [22:25] nah, don't worry [22:26] I guess it would make sense to have a "Hardy driver", "$release driver" for past releases [22:26] I'm interested in fixing problems in karmic and hardy [22:26] Where should I raise this suggestion? [22:26] something like that, yes. I am going to raise this on next bugsquad/control meeting [22:27] Laibsch: a good place would be the devel-discuss and bugcontrol mailing lists [22:27] bdmurray: 464612 was a grub bug anyhow. [22:27] hggdh: I don't like to subscribe to yet another mailing list [22:27] :-) [22:27] when is that meeting going to be held? [22:27] I suppose it's being done in IRC? [22:27] first tuesday of every month, here [22:28] time... I *think* it is 1600Z [22:29] Laibsch: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad/Meeting [22:29] so, yes, 1600Z [22:29] 16:00 UTC, actually [22:29] that's quite some time out [22:30] yes, this is why I suggested the MLs [22:30] And I'll likely be without internet for the next one [22:30] 12th, not the 5th? [22:30] that's probably doable for me [22:30] send it to the bugsquad ML (or bugcontrol, or devel-discuss) [22:31] oh, I was wrong, it is the second Tuesday, not the first [22:34] please finishi editing that page ;-) [22:34] anyway, I just added an additional topic for next meeting [22:34] just did [22:34] :-) [22:35] I would not call it pollution [22:35] the nominations are a great way to alert the right people that something needs fixing in an older release [22:35] ... if used properly [22:35] I went for the kill, Laibsch. Nominations are good, but if they are not acted on, they just pollute [22:36] I all in favour of them but -- like your bug example -- they must either be accepted or rejected [22:38] what's the alternative? [22:38] bugs are marked as fixed when the fix is in release+1 [22:38] and I think that makes sense [22:39] As I said, I'd be willing to comb through bugs for hardy and karmic [22:39] and there aren't that many to be overwhelming [22:41] for those fixed, yes [22:53] hggdh Could i add to the agenda the ammount of Incomplete bugs which havent had a reply for a good couple of months/years - I know they don't count towards any stats but there is alot of them :) [22:55] nperry: this is a good start for a statistic: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+expirable-bugs [22:58] Is there a magical time for it to be set as invaild? Or has it got to be done manually? [22:58] nperry: you can, but we already discussed it [22:58] currently dropping for expiry has been disabled for Ubuntu bugs [22:58] it would be -- by default -- 60 days [22:59] If its already been discussed I wont do :) [22:59] genrically, anyone can add a topic for the meeting (but should also be present to explain) [22:59] nperry: the list I gave you are the bugs that would already be invalid if the feature was turned on [23:00] it was discussed on UDS, IIRC [23:01] Is there any remote log of this? [23:02] of waht was noted down, yes, the blueprints [23:02] I do not remember if the session was videotaped, though [23:03] * nperry going to look in gobby :) [23:07] hggdh: bug 495724 files have now been attached by OR [23:07] Launchpad bug 495724 in b43-fwcutter "Broadcom 4306( b43-fwcutter) Wireless can't connect to Access Points WEP/WPA/Unsecure." [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/495724 [23:10] direct probes are failing.. now thats threw me [23:11] I have been off the BCM world for a while, so I am not sure how things are not. I will mark it triaged [23:15] done [23:16] Thankyou hggdh :) [23:39] hggdh: I just received a comment from Steve Langasek that indeed the feature is not used because signal-to-noise is too low. To improve that I think that making nominations for a release possibly only after a ticket has been closed as fix released would be a good idea. [23:39] what do you think about this suggestion? [23:40] Laibsch: that's the only time it's possible for anything to be done about it anyways [23:40] exactly [23:40] and it would decrease the noise considerably, I think [23:46] bdmurray: can you bump the ff version in the firefox-lp-improvements package to 3.6.*? [23:54] Laibsch: good idea, but willrequire lp changes [23:55] hggdh: you think it should be discussed at the meeting before filing a bug? [23:55] I think it should be discussed by all, yes -- bug-control/squad and devel [23:56] since I myself do not approve/reject, I am unsure of all possible impacts