[01:10] <persia> slangasek: So, did you want the 29th 20:00 slot?  If not, I need to prep for it :)
[01:48] <ScottK> slangasek: texlive-latex-base is currently uninstallable due to depending on luatex.  luatex is a depends now.  It looks to me like it's either a MIR for luatex (at a glance I think all it's depends/rdepends are in Main) or rip all the luatex stuff out of texlive-latex-base.  I'd rather keep it so we can sync Tex stuff from Debian.  What do you think?
[13:50] <derknecht> i have a encrypted ubuntu 9.10 installed, and had problems with grub2, i am now using grub1 (from my gentoo installation)  and want to know how the kernel line in menu.lst should look like for booting a encrypted root file system (installed with alternate cd). Thanks a lot.
[13:52] <persia> derknecht: You might get more support in #ubuntu : this isn't a support channel, and it's a weekend, when lots of people don't pay attention to this channel.
[13:53] <derknecht> persia: k, thanks
[13:54] <persia> derknecht: Good luck.
[14:08] <derknecht> persia: solved :D
[14:09] <persia> Excellent!
[16:12] <LLStarks> hi, if i have a grievance about a dev decision regarding lucid, do i put it here or in ubuntu+1?
[16:13] <ion> Either, if you want nothing to happen. If you want someone to notice it, file a bug report or a blueprint, depending on the type of your wish.
[16:16] <persia> bug report is generally better for something described as a grievance (unless it is of the class of "Why isn't there a pony on the CD?".
[16:16] <LLStarks> it's about the new bottom-tabbed nautilus
[16:17] <LLStarks> it sucks
[16:17] <persia> But for "Why did my pony get taken away?", a bug report is definitely better.
[16:17] <persia> That's "Why did my pony get replaced by an aardvark?", and also better as a bug.
[16:17] <LLStarks> it is so annoying that i want to e-punch the person that signed off on it
[16:18] <LLStarks> also, i'm unsure of the proper mailing list
[16:18] <persia> Run `ubuntu-bug nautilus` on a system experiencing it.
[16:18] <geser> I got hit by this "feature" too on the first time: I opened several tabs till I noticed that they're at the bottom now
[16:19] <persia> Bugs written from the viewpoint of "How usability can be improved by restoring previous behaviour" without e-punches tend to get the best treatment.
[16:20] <LLStarks> don't these sort of bugs have an omnipresence that every developer and their dog should already know about?
[16:21] <LLStarks> or are devs so foolish as to not see the repercussions of their enhancements?
[16:22] <persia> As you've seen, a developer has been hit with that bug.  Doesn't mean anyone filed it, or that anyone is working on reverting it.
[16:22] <persia> More than anything, these things need discussion.
[16:23] <LLStarks> as  far as i heard, the people that decided said the decision was closed.
[16:24] <LLStarks> and was an upstream thing
[16:24] <persia> Ah, if that's documented in an upstream bug, then, yeah, Ubuntu is likely to follow that.
[16:24] <persia> Your best bet is to continue the discussion upstream.
[16:26] <geser> LLStarks: gnome bug #606027
[16:27] <LLStarks> thanks.
[17:28] <sebner> persia: that's not a bug that's a decision upstream made (I hope it'll be reverted though)
[17:29] <persia> sebner: A "bug" is how we describe anything that represents an atomic change to software.
[17:30] <persia> It's not like a crash, but I stand by my opinion that a bug tracker is the best place to discuss it.
[17:30] <sebner> persia: Sure, but wondering if you can declare something upstream decided as "bug"
[17:30] <persia> Why not, if I disagree.
[17:31] <persia> Doesn't mean they have to fix it :)
[17:31] <sebner> persia: It's always a question of how much influence the users have and how stubborn upstream is
[17:32] <persia> And the quality and strength of arguments for each viewpoint.
[17:32] <hyperair> if we're not reverting that stupid commit, i'm going to be maintaining a custom build of nautilus.
[17:33] <hyperair> and if more of this stupidity continues happening, i might just end up in gentoo ¬_¬
[17:33] <sebner> persia: haha, speaking of strength and quality ... "Too much stuff is already up there so let's put it down to the bottom" ..
[17:33] <persia> sebner: If you have a stronger argument (for either viewpoint), please add it to that bug.
[17:34] <sebner> persia: My opinion is already covered by the present comments and I think they are pretty valid
[17:34] <persia> There you go then :)
[17:35] <hyperair> persia: so what happens when we all have very nice and valid comments, but upstream continues to be stubborn?
[17:35] <hyperair> s/comments/arguments against tabs-at-bottom/
[17:36] <sebner> hyperair: accept it, change distro, custom nautilus build :P
[17:37] <Ng> what does changing distro have to do with what gnome upstream is doing?
[17:37] <hyperair> >_>
[17:37] <persia> hyperair: If upstream will not change, there are three choices: 1) fork, 2) make a distro-level change 3) make a personal change.
[17:37] <sebner> Ng: Kubuntu ;)
[17:37] <persia> I don't think it's worth changing distros just because you want to apply some patch.
[17:38] <hyperair> Ng: i'm just saying, if more stupidity comes from multiple different apps, and i end up maintaining custom builds of several different apps, i might as well go gentoo where i have to compile every damn thing anyway.
[17:38] <sebner> persia: I didn't say anything about being worth it, it's just an option
[17:39] <Ng> hyperair: sounds like a lot of effort just to move a tab bar ;)
[17:39] <hyperair> Ng: well, GNOME upstream has been rather stupid lately.
[17:40] <hyperair> Ng: you never know what they're going to do next.
[17:44] <hyperair> oh by the way, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nautilus/+bug/509079
[17:44] <hyperair> we've got an ubuntu bug as well.
[18:46] <jcastro> you could probably maintain your own patchset like the nautilus-elementary folks do
[19:56] <ScottK> On the off chance there's an archive admin with shell access around .... https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/lucid/armel/luatex/0.50.0-1 still needs promotion to Mail.
[19:58] <ScottK> Mail/Main
[22:46] <gavintlgold> can someone explain to me what "sudo apt-get remove programname{p}" does? I'm not talking about apt-get remove in general but adding the {p} to the end of the name.
[22:47] <gavintlgold> I'm assuming it removes instances of the app installed via the "make install" command after compiling. is this assumption correct?
[22:48] <owen1> my dell uses Elantech touchpad and I can't configure it. i contacted dell and they refered me to cananical. i didn't hear back from canonical.  who is the maintainer of elantech driver?
[22:49] <owen1> someone told me EEEpc also has it and it's possible to configure it.
[22:49] <owen1> can you guys direct me toward a solution?
[22:51] <owen1> here is a link to someone how wrote a driver -  http://arjan.opmeer.net/elantech/
[22:51] <owen1> it's noo complex for me to understand it though.
[22:52] <RAOF> gavintlgold: No, that's not correct.
[22:53] <RAOF> gavintlgold: There's no way (in general) to remove instances of an app installed via “make install”, and it's outside the scope of the package manager.
[22:53] <RAOF> gavintlgold: What {p} means is “purge” which, in addition to removing the package, also removes the (system wide) config files - ie: stuff in /etc.
[23:28] <owen1> how to find a maintainer of a touchpad driver?
[23:58] <soreau> Hey I was wondering, where are the settings stored that gnome-window-properties sets?
[23:58] <soreau> I assume somewhere in ~/.gconf, but which key?
[23:59] <soreau> Trying to figure out how to change the titlebar doubleclick action without gnome-window-properties