[00:09] <micahg> cjohnston: just because a bug also occurs on another OS doesn't make it invalid
[00:10] <micahg> cjohnston: wishlist done
[00:27] <cjohnston> wishlist bug 501150
[00:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 501150 in xterm "Merge xterm 251-1 (main) from Debian testing (main)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/501150
[00:44] <jibel> cjohnston, bug 501150 is a merge request.
[00:44] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 501150 in xterm "Merge xterm 251-1 (main) from Debian testing (main)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/501150
[00:45] <jibel> cjohnston, you'd better leave them alone unless you know what you're doing.
[00:45] <jibel> cjohnston, you can find information about those special report at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage#Special%20types%20of%20bugs
[07:27] <anon^_^> anyone familiar with Ubuntu bug squad member afflux?
[07:27] <anon^_^> trying to reach him, but doesn't appear he's been active since Jan, 2009
[07:29]  * anon^_^ listens for crickets chirping
[08:25] <Yos> resuming from hibernate <-- what package would that come under?
[10:51] <qense> Is it up to the application to fill the bookmark list of GtkFileChooser? And wasn't there a new feature in Qt/KDE applications that makes them use the GtkFileChooser dialogue when GNOME is running?
[13:43] <PrototypeX29A> hi, i would like to file a bug report for the user manager in the adminstration-menu, but i do not know the name of the package
[13:47] <PrototypeX29A> cu
[17:47] <cyan-spam> hello all. got a question about policy here
[17:48] <hggdh> cyan-spam: please ask
[17:50] <cyan-spam> i'm experiencing https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/474990 and am working on debugging it
[17:50] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 474990 in linux "[Hewlett-Packard Presario R4000 (PX353UA#ABA)] suspend/resume failure" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[17:51] <cyan-spam> i'm not the original reporter, but am pretty sure the guy has the same issue as me. am i free to muck around with the report (eg, change the package)?
[17:51] <cyan-spam> or should i file a different report?
[17:51] <hggdh> well
[17:52] <hggdh> if your hardware is *exactly* the same as the reporter, then you could use this bug
[17:52] <hggdh> otherwise, better to open a new bug
[17:52] <hggdh> BTW, why would you change the package? If it is a suspend/resume issue, it is the kernel
[17:52] <cyan-spam> i think it's actually a bug in an x driver
[17:52] <cyan-spam> i can't reproduce using pm-suspend from a VT
[17:52] <hggdh> oh
[17:53] <hggdh> hum
[17:53] <cyan-spam> and i can also reproduce same hang just by switching VTs
[17:53] <cyan-spam> though less often
[17:53] <hggdh> then I think it might be a better idea, really, to open a new bug -- and reference this one -- under X
[17:53] <cyan-spam> ok sounds good. thank you!
[17:53] <hggdh> cyan-spam: welcome, and thank you for heping
[17:55] <cyan-spam> hggdh: sure thing. by the way, do you know the recommended way of generating an xorg.conf these days? so i can play around with different drivers?
[17:56] <hggdh> cyan-spam: at least for me, I can look at the /var/log/Xorg.0.log and get the default config from there (it is printed out in the log)
[17:56] <hggdh> then just create /etc/X11/xorg.conf based on the default, and adjust as needed
[17:56] <hggdh> this is what I did right now, on Lucid, to get X working again
[17:57] <hggdh> (bloody ATI driver is segv-ing)
[17:59] <hggdh> btw, time to find out if it is a known issue
[17:59] <cyan-spam> hggdh: ok, found it. thanks again
[18:01] <cyan-spam> i wish there was a bit more documentation on how xorg config works these days. i find the wiki pages are all mixed up about it
[18:11] <hggdh> it is changing a lot, lately... volunteers are welcome to update the docs ;-)
[18:13] <cyan-spam> hehe
[18:13] <cyan-spam> too bad volunteers need to know the information first!
[18:13] <hggdh> heh
[18:32] <slacker_nl> hello
[18:32] <PrototypeX29A> hi
[18:33] <slacker_nl> have a problem on jaunty, bugs 384550/350562 are fix released but not for Jaunty, I still have the bug
[18:33] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 384550 in gdesklets "[jaunty] gdesklets should depend on python2.5 - fails to start with Could not launch 'gDesklets'" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/384550
[18:33] <slacker_nl> do i reopen them?
[18:36] <hggdh> slacker_nl: you can nominate it for Jaunty
[18:41] <slacker_nl> hggdh: k
[18:45] <PrototypeX29A> is there a specified behaviour for users-admin?
[18:45] <PrototypeX29A> i don't think it is behaving correctly
[18:48] <hggdh> PrototypeX29A: please explain
[18:49] <PrototypeX29A> hggdh: my standard-user is not shown, and it definetely exists as i can log in
[18:50] <PrototypeX29A> so i am assuming, there is an error, but i can't be sure as there is no specification for the behaviour of "users-admin"
[18:51] <PrototypeX29A> hggdh: and for sure users-admin does not usually list all existing users in /etc/shadow
[18:53] <hggdh> PrototypeX29A: what version of Ubuntu? Here I can see my account on users-admin
[18:54] <PrototypeX29A> it is Karmic, but i don't have this problem with all my 9.10s only with this one
[18:55] <PrototypeX29A> so there are two possibilities a) it's a bug,  b) my system is messed up
[18:55] <hggdh> I personally tend to (b) ;-)
[18:55] <hggdh> try creating a new account, for tests, and then login to it, and try there
[18:57] <PrototypeX29A> i would tend to (b) to, but i cannot say it for sure, as these are not distinguishable without a spec :)
[18:57] <hggdh> users-admin should, by default, show all user accounts
[18:58] <hggdh> but, no system ones. You would have to change a setting on gconf to get the system accounts
[18:58] <PrototypeX29A> there are a lot of users, which are not really meant to login an, like, gdm, uucp, haldeamon etc.
[18:59] <PrototypeX29A> gconf?
[18:59] <hggdh> these are the system users
[18:59] <PrototypeX29A> is it possible users-admin mistakes my account for a system account?
[19:01] <hggdh> might, if your account id is less than 1000
[19:02] <hggdh> which would mean you created it manually
[19:02] <PrototypeX29A> no, i did not
[19:03] <hggdh> but, on a terminal, run 'id' -- this will print out the user, ids, and groups
[19:03] <PrototypeX29A> it's 1000
[19:04] <hggdh> so it should be shown
[19:05] <PrototypeX29A> then i will consider it a bug :)
[19:05] <PrototypeX29A> which package does it belong to
[19:05] <PrototypeX29A> can't find a package for users-admin
[19:07] <hggdh> gnome-system-tools
[19:08] <hggdh> (dpkg -L users-admin will show the package)
[19:10] <PrototypeX29A> it does not recognize -L as a parameter
[19:14] <hggdh> darn, typo... it is -S
[19:16] <PrototypeX29A> will every user get its own group?
[19:16] <PrototypeX29A> i tried to add a user "gast" and got the errp
[19:16] <PrototypeX29A> error group "gast" already exists
[19:17] <hggdh> yes, every new user will have a group with the same name
[19:19] <PrototypeX29A> if i add a new user it will appear in /etc/shadows but not in the users-admin list
[19:19] <PrototypeX29A> only "root"
[19:20] <PrototypeX29A> but this problem will not be reproduceable
[19:21] <hggdh> did you try to login under a brand new userid?
[19:21] <PrototypeX29A> and then?
[19:22] <PrototypeX29A> i can login as the new user, but it is not shown as an option in the login-menu
[19:25] <hggdh> then try to run users-admin
[19:25] <PrototypeX29A> the same effect
[19:26] <PrototypeX29A> i only can see the root
[19:26] <hggdh> un users-admin?
[19:26] <hggdh> s/un/on/
[19:26] <PrototypeX29A> yes
[19:26] <PrototypeX29A> in /etc/password i can see all users
[19:27] <PrototypeX29A> passwd
[19:28] <PrototypeX29A> does users-admin use /etc/passwd as base for its representation?
[19:29] <hggdh> I have not looked at the code, but I would expect /etc/passwd would be used somewhere along the search
[19:32] <PrototypeX29A> i would not know where else it could search
[19:33] <hggdh> open a bug, and we will see what happens
[19:33] <PrototypeX29A> it will stay unconfirmed forever, i guess :)
[19:36] <hggdh> who knows? ;-) but give me the bug #
[19:43] <PrototypeX29A> lp #501421
[19:43] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 501421 in gnome-system-tools "[users-admin] Users-admin will does not show any users except 'root'" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/501421
[19:44] <hggdh> PrototypeX29A: let's see what happens, but I will give it a try
[19:44] <PrototypeX29A> how? :)
[19:44] <hggdh> look at the code, and try to imagine what might have gone wrong. But root should not be shown...
[19:45] <PrototypeX29A> so then there is a related bug
[19:45] <PrototypeX29A> i will try to upload  /etc/passwd
[19:46] <micahg> should the bug be private then?
[19:46] <PrototypeX29A> i don't think this is a security thread, is it?
[19:46] <PrototypeX29A> as the password information is stored in /etc/shadows
[19:47] <hggdh> not really a security threat, more a potential privacy issue
[19:48] <PrototypeX29A> i would not use twitter, if i cared for that stuff :)
[19:49] <hggdh> if this was to be a server, with multiple users, I would worry a bit more. But for a personal system, not much is gained, apart from the user name
[19:52] <Prototyp1X29A> re
[19:55] <MTecknology> I can't install chromium-browser :S it says no candidate version found for chromium-browser
[19:56] <MTecknology> !info chromium-browser
[19:56] <ubot4> MTecknology: Package chromium-browser does not exist in karmic
[19:56] <MTecknology> :S ... it shows up in aptitude search chromium-browser
[19:56] <micahg> MTecknology: it's not in the distro, it's from a PPA
[19:59] <MTecknology> micahg: I'm wondering why aot thinks it's available..
[19:59] <micahg> aot?
[19:59] <micahg> apt?
[19:59] <MTecknology> apt*
[19:59] <MTecknology> c   chromium-browser                      - Chromium browser
[19:59] <micahg> MTecknology: apt-cache policy chromium-browser
[20:00] <MTecknology>   Installed: (none)  Candidate: (none)  Version table:     4.0.222.3~svn20091009r28536-0ubuntu1~ucd1 0        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
[20:01] <micahg> MTecknology: it was probably installed at some point and maybe the PPa was disabled
[20:01] <MTecknology> ok
[20:01] <MTecknology> thanks
[20:01] <micahg> MTecknology: do you need the link to the PPA?
[20:02] <MTecknology> nope
[20:03] <MTecknology> I'm installing now
[20:11] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: looks the tool uses its own profile data in /etc/gnome-system-tools/users/profile
[20:11] <Prototyp1X29A> profiles
[20:11] <Prototyp1X29A> hmm no, this is something else. I was suspecting redundant data
[20:13] <slacker_nl> when you supply a debdif to a bug report then one would subscribe $someone@u.c ?
[20:17] <micahg> slacker_nl: depends what you are trying to do
[20:20] <slacker_nl> micahg: created a debdiff for ajaunty package to close 2 bugs
[20:20] <micahg> slacker_nl: if it's an SRU, then you need to follow this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[20:21] <slacker_nl> lemme have a lok, thnx
[20:21] <slacker_nl> look
[20:23] <slacker_nl> i think it is sru
[20:25] <micahg> slacker_nl: an update to an existing release is an SRU :)
[20:27] <slacker_nl> added ubuntu-sru
[20:29] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: these are the default for an adminstrator, Desktop user and common users (which you can set on the users-admin)
[20:31] <micahg> slacker_nl: do you have a test case in the description?
[20:32] <slacker_nl> micahg: by test case you mean?
[20:32] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: yes, i could not find the part where the actual configs are read
[20:32] <slacker_nl> i've changed a dependency because it doesn't start without it
[20:32] <micahg> slacker_nl: steps for the QA team to verify your patch fixes the issue in teh specified version
[20:32] <slacker_nl> and it builds on my box...
[20:33] <slacker_nl> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gdesklets/+bug/350562
[20:33] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 350562 in gdesklets "gdesklets requires python2.5 without package dependency" [Undecided,Fix released]
[20:33] <slacker_nl> that's the one
[20:33] <slacker_nl> micahg: ^^
[20:35] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: src/users/users-tool.c ?
[20:36] <micahg> slacker_nl: I think that's ok
[20:37] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: oobs_users_config_get()?
[20:37] <hggdh> slacker_nl: just a question -- did you verify it to build correctly? Note that simply building on your machine is *not* enough
[20:38] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: yes, thereabout
[20:38] <hggdh> slacker_nl: because you may have changed dependencies, and you have them all installed
[20:39] <slacker_nl> hggdh: like in a PPA? negative
[20:39] <slacker_nl> hggdh: the build depends were correct, but the normal depends were not
[20:40] <hggdh> slacker_nl: (1) yes, like a PPA, or a pbuilder; (2) ah, so you just changed the run-time depends?
[20:40] <micahg> slacker_nl: actually, SRU usually likes explicit test case, so maybe make a before and after in the description
[20:42] <slacker_nl> hggdh: ahh, k, I could do a pbuilder build and/or ppa if they want me too, and yes, it had a dependency for python (which is 2.6 on jaunty) and not 2.5, so i changed python to python2.5
[20:44] <micahg> hggdh: if nothing in the build was changed, then it just needs to be test installed on a stock jaunty system
[20:46] <hggdh> micahg: yes, I agree
[20:49] <slacker_nl> it happens that I have stock jaunty ;)
[20:49] <hggdh> heh
[20:50] <hggdh> slacker_nl: BTW, thank you for working on this
[20:50] <slacker_nl> np
[20:52] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: the other bug you referred to (root being shown) is at get_users_tool_contructor()
[20:53] <porthose> slacker_nl, you may want to try something like python (>=2.5), just an idea :)
[20:54] <slacker_nl> porthose: no, since 2.6 won't work
[20:57] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: yes, but is root shown at every instance, or only sometimes at some systems?
[20:57] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: i am not sure whether it is a real bug or just a feature wish
[20:59] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: right now, it is always shown. I do not know if this was the intention, but the code implements a gconf key for it (showroot), which is not yet created
[20:59] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: i am trying to do a command-line listing tool which uses the oobs-library, to isolate the bug
[21:00] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: cool. Please update the bug as needed. It still sounds like something in your setup got mangled, though
[21:00] <Prototyp1X29A> yes, but it would help to know what :)
[21:01] <Prototyp1X29A> i am under the impression, that only the /etc/passwd should be used as reference for the listing
[21:04] <slacker_nl> hggdh/micahg: so no extra stuff for sru, leave it as is? or...
[21:08] <hggdh> slacker_nl: I think this is good enough
[21:08] <slacker_nl> hggdh: k
[21:08] <slacker_nl> thnx for the help
[21:10] <slacker_nl> gn all
[21:13] <hggdh> gn, slacker_nl
[21:20] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: the showroot part is fixed on GIT, and should land on Lucid on next update
[21:23] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: just got an update, that my bug is a duplicate
[21:24] <Prototyp1X29A> lp #210710
[21:24] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 210710 in gnome-system-tools "System > Admin > Users and Groups: only root available" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/210710
[21:32] <hggdh> yes, Milan is usually very responsive
[21:33] <hggdh> run the checks he is asking for, please, this will help
[21:33] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: BTW, please answer on 210710
[21:35] <AntonyS> can I set bug 500487 to confirmed?
[21:35] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 500487 in gnome-applets "[lucid] volume icon twice in systray" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/500487
[21:36] <hggdh> AntonyS: if you see the same, yes. Also add a comment about that
[21:37] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: yes i am prepario
[21:37] <Prototyp1X29A> preparing a new report right now
[21:37] <AntonyS> I haven't, but there are screenshots and one other person responded to say they had
[21:37] <hggdh> AntonyS: then please state you are confirming based on the other user's input
[22:08] <Prototyp1X29A> hggdh: seems there were bogus entries in /etc/login.defs
[22:09] <Prototyp1X29A> thanks for your help, it's working now
[22:10] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: did you add a comment on the bug about that?
[22:10] <Prototyp1X29A> sure, it is all documented
[22:12] <hggdh> Prototyp1X29A: thank you
[22:27] <EagleSn> hi