[02:52] <DanaG> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/udisks/+bug/568926
[02:59] <DanaG> -bash: /etc/bash_completion.d/apt: line 32: syntax error near unexpected token `;'
[02:59] <DanaG> -bash: /etc/bash_completion.d/apt: line 32: `                    2> /dev/null ); $( apt-cache --no-generate pkgnames "lib$cur" \'
[03:02] <JontheEchidna> ^got that too
[03:04] <DanaG> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bash-completion/+bug/586586
[04:41] <Sarvatt> has anyone tried the new fglrx in the x-updates ppa? i dont have any hardware to test it on and want to know if the packages have problems
[04:43] <DanaG> hmm, link me to it, and I'll give it a try.
[04:43] <DanaG> er, wait, I'm on 34 kernel... I need kano's script to patch fglrx to make that work.
[04:47] <Sarvatt> yea its got the patch in the ppa
[04:47] <Sarvatt> https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat/+archive/x-updates
[04:47] <Sarvatt> aint gonna work in lucid for long, xserver 1.8.1 has been waiting to be merged for weeks :)
[04:49] <DanaG> also weird: I tried the new fglrx with edgers, and got "server reported 7.1.1.0, wanted 7.5.1.0."
[04:50] <DanaG> I also use the backclear patch.
[04:51] <DanaG> hmm, I'll be interested to see the UEFI support in Maverick... though my UEFI firmware is a bit broken.
[04:51] <DanaG> Recent kernels all fail to find the initramfs.... and then fail to find the root, because of that.
[04:55] <Sarvatt> 7.1.1.0 7.5.1.0? you sure it wasn't 7.0 and 6.0?
[04:56] <DanaG> yeah.  I don't have the log in hand, but I clearly remember a 7.5 and a 7.1.
[04:56] <DanaG> And what's weird is that what it wanted, was NEWER than what it reported.
[04:57] <DanaG> (10:08:29 AM) [Enrico]: DanaG: iirc that's an hack to let fglrx work with xorg xserver 1.8
[04:57] <DanaG> (10:08:46 AM) [Enrico]: xorg is patched to report a different version
[04:57] <DanaG> in #ati
[10:49] <knittl> any news on the metacity/CSD front?
[10:50] <arand> knittl: as in fixing the breakage? Not that I know..
[10:50] <knittl> arand: ok
[10:50] <knittl> i'm thinking about installing the ppa
[10:51] <knittl> a lot of apps cause metacity to crash
[10:51] <knittl> that sucks :D
[10:51] <knittl> arand: do you have a url to the ppa?
[10:51] <arand> Yea, or just bring in the libmetacity-private0 metacity and metacity-common from it, there's a bunch of unrealted stuff in the ppa I think...hang on
[10:52] <arand> Bug #584287
[10:52] <arand> Need wget?
[10:52] <knittl> no, i can use epiphany
[10:52] <arand> https://edge.launchpad.net/~fta/+archive/sandbox/+packages
[10:53] <knittl> how can i only install metacity?
[10:54] <knittl> ah ok, debs
[10:54] <arand> knittl: click on metacity in the list, and download the appropriate debs
[10:54] <knittl> cool, thanks :)
[10:54] <arand> libmetacity-private0 metacity metacity-common
[10:55] <arand> Are the one's normally installed it seems.
[10:55] <knittl> jip, i'm already downloading
[11:00] <gnomefreak> win 1
[11:04] <knittl> ok, let's see if it worked
[11:04] <knittl> yay! \o/
[12:11] <Leftmost> It seems packages.ubuntu.com is behind, not reflecting some of the most recent lucid updates, but also not showing anything from maverick. Is this intentional?
[12:14] <Leftmost> My real goal being to determine if there are packages for totem 2.31.x.
[13:18] <gnomefreak> anyone else having a problem getting X to load?
[13:41] <arand> Leftmost: Look at LP instead.
[13:46] <Leftmost> Ahh, fair enough. Thank you.
[16:26] <Ian_Corne> ubuntu Netbook remix is icky
[16:26] <Ian_Corne> if you launch a normal Gnome session, it still lingers
[16:26] <Ian_Corne> no title bar
[16:26] <Ian_Corne> and stuff
[17:47] <billybigrigger> hey all anyone alive
[17:47] <guntbert> no :-)
[17:48] <billybigrigger> experiencing some weird gtk bugs i think
[17:48] <billybigrigger> was missing the window decorations for a bit, a quick logout/in fixed that
[17:48] <billybigrigger> but now everytime i open a terminal i get this...
[17:50] <penguin42> billybigrigger: Yeh I got that as well
[17:50] <billybigrigger> http://pastebin.ca/1873896
[17:50] <billybigrigger> just lost them again after firing up firefox
[17:51] <penguin42> yeh I also got that
[17:51] <billybigrigger> penguin42, is there an active bug report for these issues yet?
[17:51] <penguin42> dunno
[17:53]  * penguin42 wishes someone would put some extra coal on the machine that runs launchpad
[17:54] <billybigrigger> hehe
[17:54] <penguin42> has anyone managed to get any kvm setup where 3d stuff works, albeit slowly - any of the setups I've tried as soon as I run gnome-shell or similar I get corruption all over
[18:35] <dupondje> aiccu bug killed :)
[18:35] <dupondje> upgrade should go without problems now :P
[18:50] <dupondje> penguin42: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/546794
[18:51] <penguin42> dupondje: Ah, thank you
[18:52] <dupondje> can be easyly fixed tho :lp
[18:52] <dupondje> deleting 2 ';' and your ok :D
[18:54] <dupondje> any other bugs btw? seems working quite well :)
[18:54] <penguin42> I had a window manager crash, and I also had some mouse pointer corruption
[18:57] <dupondje> whats the bug of the firefox/thunderbird issue btw
[18:59] <dupondje> the metacity bug
[18:59] <penguin42> don't know, I hadn't see that one
[19:00] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/metacity/+bug/584287
[19:00] <dupondje> found :)
[19:01] <DanaG> I also don't like the idea of aptitude install clut<tab> giving you MORE characters to backspace.
[19:01] <DanaG> clut<tab> gives clutter.... to backspace, that's 7 characters
[19:01] <DanaG> libclutter is 10 characters.
[19:05] <virtuald> use ctrl-w
[19:08] <DanaG> wow, I never knew about that... that's cool.
[19:12] <virtuald> :) the text gets to the "yank" buffer so you can yank it back with ctrl-y. there's also ctrl-u to delete to the beginning of the line and something else (which i don't remember) to delete to the end of the line
[19:14] <DanaG> !find libssl.so.7
[19:22] <switchgirl> !iso
[19:23] <switchgirl> i need to d/l the iso
[19:23] <switchgirl> how'd i do that?
[19:24] <switchgirl> ie where can i
[19:24] <kklimonda> !daily
[19:24] <kklimonda> but only if they have started spinning them already
[19:27] <uber> I need help!
[19:37] <switchgirl> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily/20100527.1/ is the most direct :) thanks though kklimonda
[19:38] <arand> Yea, we only have one single daily for the alternative CD.
[20:56] <guntbert> during the install process (in "expert mode") I am prompted to choose a kernel, the possibilities are somewhat weird though : linux-generic (sensible), linux-image-generic (what is the difference?) and lastly linux-image-2.6.34-4-generic (again: what is the difference) -- any ideas what that is supposed to be meaning?
[21:00] <arand> guntbert: Report a bug, the two other are metapackages which depends on each other, in that order, if I'm not wholly mistaken...
[21:01] <guntbert> arand: so I thought - against what package should that bur be reported ? casper?
[21:01] <arand> guntbert: i.e. linux-image depends: linux-image-generic depands: linux-image-2.6.31-21-generic (on karmic), this should always be the latest kernel...
[21:04] <arand> guntbert: Hmm, I would venture a guess that the problem is not in debian-installer, but it's at least a start for writing a bug-report (casper is likely not to blame..)
[21:04] <guntbert> arand: will do, thx
[21:06] <arand> guntbert: Casper handles the premade liveCD filesystem btw, hence, afaik, it's something completely different.
[21:07] <BUGabundo> evening slackers & weekenders
[21:07] <guntbert> arand: ok, I'm getting my feet wet with understanding the different components in the install process - thx for the hints
[21:09] <arand> Yea, /me don't understand these components either, but at least well enough to make a rough guess.
[21:11] <arand> If it's actually in the super-advanced section, it might even be that the distiction is intended, so you install the kernel version itself if you want manual control over updates... I've never poked in the alternate cd that much...
[21:12] <guntbert> evening BUGabundo -- do you happen to know against what package a bug in the install process (expert mode) should be reported ? debian-installer?
[21:13] <BUGabundo> guess so
[21:13] <arand> Well, strictly it's in the package selection, which I'm not sure if it's integrated or a separate module of debian-installer (tasksel? or is that only for group-installs??)
[21:13] <BUGabundo> there's also ubity or what ever its called
[21:14] <penguin42> ubiquity?
[21:14] <arand> ubiquity, but that's the one on the liveCD version
[21:14] <arand> Not on the alternate CD, there it's debian-installer
[21:16] <guntbert> arand: thx, you got it right (from the wiki: If you encounter the bug when installing from the Alternate or Server CDs, the package is debian-installer. )
[21:18] <BUGabundo> that
[21:20] <BUGabundo> bash: /etc/bash_completion.d/apt: line 33: `                    2> /dev/null); )'
[21:20] <BUGabundo> someone already reported the bash bug?
[21:20] <penguin42> yeh
[21:20] <BUGabundo> The following NEW packages will be installed:
[21:20] <BUGabundo>   phonon-backend-gstreamer{a}
[21:20] <BUGabundo> The following packages will be REMOVED:
[21:20] <BUGabundo>   libxine1{a} phonon-backend-xine{a}
[21:21] <BUGabundo> humm changing backends so soon?
[21:21] <BUGabundo> penguin42: bug id?
[21:21] <penguin42> #546794
[21:21] <BUGabundo> bug 546794
[21:22] <arand> Missing ";" or what it was?
[21:23] <dupondje> no
[21:23] <dupondje> to much ;
[21:23] <dupondje> :)
[21:24] <dupondje> when does nouveau gets an update in Maverick ?
[21:29] <guntbert> bug 587327
[21:30] <guntbert> arand: ^   thx for the help
[21:30] <arand> guntbert: np
[21:32] <Sarvatt> dupondje: it's in x-updates for now, still waiting to be uploaded to the archives..
[22:56] <DanaG> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/340265
[22:57] <DanaG> hmm, why are there both a "manpages-posix" and a "manpages-posix-dev" package?
[22:57] <DanaG> What's the difference?
[22:58] <penguin42> I suspect the -dev includes the api calls rather than just command lines
[22:58] <bjsnider> -dev packages hsould have development headers only
[22:58] <DanaG> Another example: manpages for most basic stuff are in manpages-dev.
[22:59] <DanaG> Looks like a slight misuse of the "-dev' suffix.
[22:59] <bjsnider> ah, yeah
[22:59] <bjsnider> that should not be split off by itself
[22:59] <bjsnider> is it like that in debian too?
[23:00] <penguin42> it makes sense to me to put stuff only of use for development in the dev package
[23:00] <DanaG> I don't have any Debian machines around.
[23:00] <penguin42> (although why yacc.1 isn't in manpages-posix-dev I don't know)
[23:12] <bjsnider> DanaG, but there's a debian packages site like the ubuntu counterpart where you can examine all debian packages
[23:13] <bjsnider> all files necessary to build against the api should be in a -dev package
[23:13] <bjsnider> typically headers
[23:17] <penguin42> bjsnider: But that rule doesn't make sense for a package that just have documentation in, and it makes sense to treat it in the same way - i.e. the documents that you use for working with that api
[23:22] <DanaG> What other documentation would there be, though?
[23:22] <DanaG> ah, manpages:
[23:22] <DanaG>  This package contains GNU/Linux manual pages for these sections:
[23:22] <DanaG>  4 = Devices (e.g. hd, sd).
[23:22] <DanaG>  5 = File formats and protocols, syntaxes of several system     files (e.g. wtmp, /etc/passwd, nfs).
[23:22] <DanaG>  7 = Conventions and standards, macro packages, etc.     (e.g. nroff, ascii).
[23:23] <penguin42> makes sense
[23:28] <DanaG> I usually like to jump on the +1 once it gets a new kernel.
[23:32] <billybigrigger> 2.3.34 is current DanaG?\
[23:32] <billybigrigger> 34-4 i should say
[23:32] <DanaG> Is it reachable via do-release-upgrade yet, or just via sources.list change?
[23:33] <billybigrigger> i did a sources change today
[23:33] <billybigrigger> worked ok i guess
[23:33] <billybigrigger> there's a firefox box that kills all the metacity controls
[23:34] <billybigrigger> haven't found much more than that :)
[23:34] <billybigrigger> why is apport still disabled by default in a testing distribution? can anyone explain this to me?
[23:34] <penguin42> billybigrigger: Probably because it would generate so much bug traffic, for an early testing one it's better for people to think about it
[23:42] <arand> billybigrigger: Seen it?: Bug #584287
[23:46] <billybigrigger> thanks arand
[23:52] <DanaG> argh, links2 and mplayer depend on old libdirectfb.
[23:59] <billybigrigger> arand, do i apply that patch directly against metacity-2.30.1/src/ui/ui.c and recompile?