=== jonathan_ is now known as jjesse [01:36] vish: you around? bug 538742 appears to be a dupe of bug 532844. This seems to be your area of expertise, should I dupe 538742 & *possibly* add an ubuntu-mono task to 532844? [01:36] Launchpad bug 538742 in ubuntu-mono (Ubuntu) "[LoginIcons] White icons on light background makes them invisible (affects: 2)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538742 [01:36] Launchpad bug 532844 in light-themes (Ubuntu Lucid) (and 3 other projects) "Lucid: White symbols on light panel and Ubuntu Logo are difficult to see (affects: 11) (dups: 2)" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/532844 [01:44] Hello, channel. Would you say that Bug #538589 should be marked as "confirmed"? "Fix comitted"? Seems that this has been addressed upstream some time ago. [01:44] Launchpad bug 538589 in ezstream (Ubuntu) "ezstream man page in incomplete and incorrect. (affects: 1)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538589 [01:47] wolfger_: as long as it isn't fixed in ubuntu don't use fix committed/released (in general at least) [01:47] wolfger_: as I don't know the package good enough I would set it confirmed for now [01:48] ah wait [01:48] you reported it [01:49] * yofel tests in lucid [01:50] wolfger_: did you try man ezstream? [01:51] there might be an upstream manpage with more details [01:51] nigelb: "man ezstream" is near-useless in Karmic [01:52] haven't gotten around to trying Lucid yet [01:52] yep, manpage is wrong in lucid [01:52] thanks, yofel [01:52] this should be fixed in debian IMO [01:52] as we just sync the package [01:52] wolfger_: open a debian bug, its easier that way :) [01:53] yofel: oh no, you're too fast ;) [01:53] LOL [01:53] * yofel looks if there's a debian bug [01:53] nigelb: :P [01:54] nope, no bug [01:55] wolfger_: do you know how to file a bug on bugs.debian.org? [01:55] yofel: I think I may have done it once, a year or so ago. Not intimately familiar with it, no. [01:56] Would be nice if Launchpad had a "forward bug to Debian" button... :-) [01:56] wolfger_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Debian/Bugs [01:56] usually using reportbug is the easiest way [02:02] Thanks. will do this when I get the chance. Night all. [02:03] wolfger_: then I'll do it now as I've got time now [03:59] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/light-themes/+bug/538853 Should be ready for Triage. Importance=Low would be my best guess on this one. [03:59] Launchpad bug 538853 in light-themes (Ubuntu) "panel transparency broken with light theme (affects: 2) (dups: 1)" [Undecided,Confirmed] [04:14] micahg, if you get a sec, i'm trying to decide if bug 534606 should be linked to mozilla 171237 (closest i found) since they kind of want the same thing, but for different reasons [04:14] Launchpad bug 534606 in firefox (Ubuntu) "Find positions match off-screen (affects: 1)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/534606 [04:14] Mozilla bug 171237 in Find In Page "Scroll view a few lines beyond occurrence of found search term with type ahead find to show more context instead of bottom of page" [Enhancement,New] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171237 [04:16] ddecator: sounds good, but I'm wondering if we already have a bug [04:16] ddecator: wait [04:17] ddecator: that bug is targetted at seamonkey [04:17] micahg, didn't even notice that...i filtered for firefox only [04:18] ddecator: hold on let me check [04:21] micahg, i just double checked and don't see anything on lp that matches it [04:28] ddecator: still working it out with the mozilla devs [04:29] micahg, sure thing. thanks [04:39] ddecator: use mozilla 440198 [04:39] Mozilla bug 440198 in Find Toolbar "If Firefox must scroll the page to display a search result, centre them vertically to the page" [Enhancement,Reopened] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440198 [04:40] micahg: sure thing. thanks [04:40] ddecator: and I already linked the LP bug upstream [04:40] micahg: perfect, thanks =) [04:41] micahg: just one quick question. since it's "enhancement" upstream, should it be "wishlist" downstream? [04:42] ddecator: well, technically, it's the fault of that banner that actually makes it "off-screen", but I'd mark it Low [04:42] micahg: alright, fair enough [04:42] ddecator: Importance is relative to the project [04:48] ddecator: are you setting the importance on the bug? [04:48] micahg: yup, just cleaned the description first [04:48] ddecator: k === kermiac is now known as kermiac_ [04:53] kermiac_: it could either be dealt with in the theme or in the icons , you can dup them and add botht the tasks === mr_steve_ is now known as mr_steve === kermiac_ is now known as kermiac [06:22] thanks vish :) [09:02] <^arky^> hi [09:03] <^arky^> apport giving me this check your network problems ? [09:49] ^arky^: known issue - bug 538097 [09:49] Launchpad bug 538097 in apport (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Apport cannot connect to crash database (affects: 84) (dups: 6)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538097 [09:49] and maybe bug 538944 [09:49] Launchpad bug 538944 in apport (Ubuntu Lucid) (and 1 other project) "apport-collect -p does not work any more (affects: 1)" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538944 [09:54] Hi people, I have question specific about reporting about Launchpads - do I also have to use ubuntu-bug, if I report bug I have collected info from other machine? It feels for me that it could be misleading for Ubuntu devs. [10:49] if the package says Fix Released for a package but one build (i386) failed - should I file a new bug report or reply to existing one? [11:18] duanedesign: Neither. Build failures are tracked in a separate automated system. [11:18] The uploader has already been notified, as well. [11:20] persia, thanks (that was me who asked duanedesign about the build failures :) ) [11:21] rye: Glad I could help. [11:50] yofel: around ? [11:50] BUGabundo_remote: yes [11:51] seems we have new _kids_ in +1 [11:51] :p [11:52] is there any known bug about empathy not connecting when started in Lucid? [11:52] hello first [11:52] how long will he last ehe [11:54] heh [12:01] Damascene, but it working when you connect manually? [12:02] no [12:02] needs restarting many times === BUGabundo_remote is now known as BUGabundo_lunch [12:07] New (3.1.4-dfsg-2ubuntu1 (well, old relatively speaking but...)) version of virtualbox-ose in Lucid... Anyone care to confirm/defirm if Bug #510571 is fixed with this version? [12:07] Launchpad bug 510571 in virtualbox-ose (Ubuntu) (and 3 other projects) "Lucid guest won't boot with acpi in virtualbox (affects: 31) (dups: 2)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/510571 [12:15] I want to report a bug that if empathy crashes or something wrong happened the bug tool says it can't connect to crash database [12:16] Damascene: known bug 538097 [12:16] Launchpad bug 538097 in apport (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Apport cannot connect to crash database (affects: 88) (dups: 6)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538097 [12:16] is that because "Chat app, and Telepathy user interface does not use Launchpad for bug tracking." === kermiac is now known as kermiac_ [12:23] bug 538097 [12:23] Launchpad bug 538097 in apport (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "+storeblob fails with "500 Internal server error" on production (works on edge) (affects: 88) (dups: 6)" [High,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/538097 [12:24] I wonder who came up with this complected title? I think if some one searched for "Apport cannot connect to crash database" wouldn't be easy to get to write crash report [12:25] *right [12:25] It was, but then it got duped to the LP bug with that title. [12:25] I think titles are made to suit the developer more than the testers [12:28] any one using the mainline kernel? [13:02] I believe https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/light-themes/+bug/538853 to be ready for Triage. [13:02] Launchpad bug 538853 in light-themes (Ubuntu) "panel transparency broken with light theme (affects: 2) (dups: 1)" [Undecided,Confirmed] === BUGabundo_lunch is now known as BUGabundo_remote [13:17] hernejj: importance? === jonathan_ is now known as jjesse [13:27] vish: Low I think. [13:28] hernejj: actually it is a wishlist , since the panel was designed to use a background image [13:29] vish: Ok, sounds good to me :) [13:31] vish: Isn't it easy enough to modify Gtk code (or panel code?) to only apply the BG image if the user's Papel properties settings are not set to use transparency? [13:32] hernejj: That would again be a wishlist in gnome-panel.. but worth a shot ;) the above bug would probably end up being a "wont fix" in the theme :) [13:34] vish: Makes perfect sense. Thanks for taking the time to explain. I'll try to remember to open this for the panel later. I'm off to work. ttyl. [13:35] if some font's doesn't look probably. what should I do? [13:35] *fonts [13:36] Damascene: you mean what to do with fonts that don't look *good*? [13:36] yes [13:37] open a bug on them: ubuntu-bug [13:37] extra points for chasing it upstream and reporting there also [13:37] every font has package name? [13:37] not really, but generically, yes [13:38] you can search for the package a file belongs to by running 'dlocate ' [13:38] well the font is freeserif in openoffice and serif in firefox [13:38] I don't know what the package name [13:38] ok [13:40] I guess it's fontconfig - generic font configuration library - support binar [13:40] I did dpkg -S serif [13:41] sansserif no freeserif or serif [13:42] Damascene: the problem here is that 'serif' and 'sansserif' are also designations for types of fonts [13:42] serif means the font has the horizontal lines limiting hieght [13:43] sansserif --- sans serif, without serif -- does not [13:43] so it is difficult to know *which* serif-ed (or sans) font is in use when you say 'serif' [13:44] how to be sure? [13:44] ffox will use serif and sansserif fonts. Drill down, and find which are in use [13:45] it's serif [13:46] ok. then you must have an installed forn called serif [13:46] (for me, I use on FFox Bistream Vera Serif) [13:47] which is to say, the serif version of Bitsream Vera [13:48] I see. I installed dlocate. the same result from dpkg -S serif, there is only this too: [13:48] *two [13:48] fontconfig-config: /etc/fonts/conf.avail/49-sansserif.conf [13:48] fontconfig-config: /etc/fonts/conf.d/49-sansserif.conf [14:42] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/539103 [14:42] Launchpad bug 539103 in firefox (Ubuntu) "Default Arabic font in Firefox is ugly (affects: 1)" [Undecided,Confirmed] [14:42] may I ask some one to look in this [15:09] how can I debug xorg/xserver? [15:09] it's not line one can run ubuntu-bug startx? [15:11] ubuntu-bug xorg will work, no? [15:11] scar: ^ [15:12] the thing is after gdm loads pc locks up, can't even ssh in [15:12] I've looked at /var/log/Xorg.0.log [15:13] if its lucid, it might be the plymouth bug [15:13] karmic and lucid both same problem [15:14] I've made a forum post http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8969966 but I don't want to submit a bug before I've got more solid info [15:16] I don't really know what to do next :-/ [15:19] I want to get amd64 8.04 to see if that could work [15:24] scar: submit a bug against linux package describing the problem clearly and mention that its the same with karmic and lucid [15:26] ok I will do that now [15:38] there is a problem with lshw in lucid. the bug need someone with mainline kernel installed [15:41] bdmurray: does the script for the reviewers team subscribe reviewers if the sponsors are subscribed? [15:42] nigelb: no it does not [15:42] bdmurray: aha, that explains why some of my work was undone :) [15:43] probably something that could added some time :) [15:43] nigelb: why should both teams be subscribed? [15:44] bdmurray: oh wait, it does not? [15:44] okay, then there is some trouble. I need to look again [15:44] right it does not subscribe the reviewers team if a -sponsors team is already subscribed to the bug report [15:45] is it possible to do it only once? [15:45] i.e., if someone actually removes the patch tag for genuine reasons, not add the tag again [15:46] why would the patch tag be removed and not a different patch- tag be added or the attachment flag unset? [15:47] I was guiding the patch towards sponsorship, so I removed the patch tag [15:47] it was a debdiff ready for uploard [15:48] a debdiff is still a patch though - I think the tag should stay [15:49] In the use case that the debdiff works fine and can be sponsored, the patch tag should still stay? [15:50] nigelb: yes [15:51] bdmurray: my issue with that process is that, once the sponsorship process is started, the patch does not need review, and only needs upload [15:51] nigelb: that's why the ubuntu-reviewers won't be subscribed to the bug report anymore [15:52] bdmurray: ah, so ideally while reviewing we should be reviewing bugs which have reviewers subscribed? [15:52] bdmurray: I think I like that model : rather than reviewing based on the patch tag, we review based on reviewers subscription. [15:52] (I've been reviewing the ones with patch tag [15:53] again, the problem with that is not all patch reviewers have membership in ubuntu-reviewers [15:53] yes I'd be looking at https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-reviewers/+subscribedbugs [15:53] nigelb: right let me check on that now [15:55] bdmurray: Bug #531533 , has been committed upstream , the review team can be unsubscribed i guess :) [15:55] Launchpad bug 531533 in tomboy (Ubuntu) (and 2 other projects) "Tomboy needs a monochrome Humanity Icon (affects: 6) (dups: 3)" [Wishlist,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/531533 [15:57] team: need help on 525308 [15:57] i just set the package [15:57] but the user needs more info [15:57] bug #525308 [15:57] bug 525308 [15:57] Launchpad bug 525308 in libusb (Ubuntu) "Does not read a USB that was read yesterday. The USB is read by other computer. (affects: 1)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/525308 [15:58] wow. this is great. [15:58] I am very new to this channel and bugs [15:59] help me to response to the user === deryck is now known as deryck[lunch] [16:05] shrini: thanks for helping out with the bugs , i'm not sure where this problem is though , someone will read the above and respond soon ;) [16:05] * nigelb is not sure either [16:08] shrini: have a look at > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingRemovableDevices , https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures#Storage%20devices [16:08] shrini: Please ask reporter to run 'ubuntu-bug' in terminal and select storage device option. [16:09] that should help collect proper information === bac` is now known as bac === scar_ is now known as tibbar [16:26] ive tried everyone combination of kernal with nvidia driver, on 64bit ubuntu. From 9.04 - 10.4 X server crashes my system so the logs never saves. Also read about everyone solution online spent about 30hours straight [16:26] still nothing, getting realllly desperate [16:27] only thing ive figured out is "unable to load nvidia kernal" is a problem [16:28] i have 8600, tried about every driver from 173-195. also got some logs [16:28] how do i report the bug correctly really want my system to run in 10.4, the lts [16:31] tibbar, hi [16:31] tibbar, are you running with /usr partition separate from / ? [16:32] tibbar, re: nvidia problem [16:44] vish: nigelb: thanks [16:44] update the bug [16:44] welcome [16:45] wishes for your ubuntu membersips === deryck[lunch] is now known as deryck === ikt_ is now known as ikt === yofel_ is now known as yofel === radoe_ is now known as radoe [19:17] bdmurray: I will test that screensaver bug again when I get a good lucid install this week [19:25] Hello, Is the crash database down? [19:25] I can't file a but with ubuntu-bug command [19:28] jjardon: known, https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-foundations/+bug/538097 [19:28] Launchpad bug 538097 in apport (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "+storeblob fails with "500 Internal server error" on production (works on edge) (affects: 95) (dups: 6)" [High,Invalid] [19:28] yofel, thank you [20:04] Can someone look at Bug 535674 and tell me if they agree that it isnt a bug, just more crying and whining? [20:04] Launchpad bug 535674 in light-themes (Ubuntu) "dust sand is one thousand times better than these new themes called Radiance - Ambiance (affects: 1)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/535674 [20:05] Looks like an opinion. Belongs on a mailing list or in forums, maybe? [20:06] thanks charlie-tca.. im going to close and offer those suggestions. [20:06] That works. There really is nothing in that to fix. [20:07] thanks charlie-tca [20:08] You are welcome [20:09] thekorn: your merge proposal in bug 539211 has the wrong reviewer set [20:09] Launchpad bug 539211 in update-manager (Ubuntu Lucid) (and 1 other project) "Lucid's update-manager does not show a warning when running on battery anymore (affects: 1)" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/539211 [20:10] bdmurray, what is the correct one? [20:10] bdmurray, I just took the pre-selected one [20:11] bdmurray, mvo? [20:11] ubuntu-core-dev [20:11] or ubuntu-dev [20:11] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Branches [20:13] bdmurray, great, thanks alot for the hint [20:13] thekorn: no problem [21:17] micahg: are firefox crashes that failed retrace get treated differently from most crashes that fail retrace? i'm not sure what info the mozillateam needs in order to work on a crash [21:17] ddecator: usually [21:20] micahg: so i'm looking at bug 521919, retrace failed, not much in the stacktrace (not sure if it's enough at least). in that case, do we remove the coredump and mark invalid? [21:20] Launchpad bug 521919 in firefox (Ubuntu) "firefox-bin crashed with SIGSEGV (affects: 1)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/521919 [21:20] ddecator: shouldn't be public with a coredump... [21:21] micahg: the reporter changed it [21:21] micahg: was going to mark private, but then i saw retrace failed [21:23] ddecator: remove the coredump and check for private info in the stacktraces...usually we mark invalid with a message, but this one has more info than njormal [21:25] micahg: sure thing. thanks