=== lifeless_ is now known as lifeless [05:30] Bug 589198 I submitted 2 weeks ago is still waiting for a retrace. Does anyone know what's going on? [05:30] Hew: Bug 589198 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/589198 is private [06:11] I created a crashreport from a Lucid Live USB, but I think that the bug may be a duplicate. [06:11] Should I mark it as duplicate? [06:11] It is currently a private bug report because of the coredump file. [06:13] My bug looks like #527951. Mine is #596170 [06:15] Also #551308 looks like mine === arcane is now known as dlbike76 === rackIT_AFK is now known as rackIT === rackIT is now known as rackIT_AFK [07:07] ddecator: for bug 571035 should i ask the OP for a new set of log files since he is using FF 3.6 and lucid? [07:07] Launchpad bug 571035 in firefox-3.5 (Ubuntu) "No sound in Flash videos after hibernate (affects: 2) (heat: 14)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/571035 [07:08] * ddecator looking [07:09] he kindof got offended that i closed his bug, i thought he said he wasn't experiecing the problem anymore =X [07:09] bug 596170 [07:09] nigelb: Bug 596170 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/596170 is private [07:11] oh, he quit. sigh. [07:13] im also going to ask him to try this in konqueror to narrow it down to wether it's actually a FF problem, or if it could be a alsa, kernel, or flash problem =X [07:13] drew212: it was a different user that said it, but it wasn't a bad call to close it since it seemed to be fixed. i'm trying to think of what the best thing would be to do for that report [07:14] check out comment #2 [07:14] oh, yah, that was just saying he didn't have time to test it, not that it was fixed (not really sure why he said that) [07:14] lol, i see that now =X [07:15] i'm going to apologize =X i feel like a jerk [07:16] ddecator: i think it would be best to get new logs, and have him test it in another browser [07:16] haha, that's not too bad, i've had people act far worse before. could you potentially test it yourself with different browsers? i usually try to avoid asking users to install new software just to test a bug (such as extra browsers to test it) especially if we can test the issue ourselves [07:17] my hibernate destroys my system afaik =D [07:17] it wont wake up, so i have to kill it [07:17] well that's not good o.o [07:17] lol, i know, i hate to report it and cause more bug reports, when i wouldn't know how to report it properly [07:19] ddecator: maybe i'm doing something wrong, how do you come out of hibernate? just move the mouse right? [07:19] hm, well you can ask if he happens to have any other browsers installed that he can test the issue with in order to try and narrow down the issue. i haven't tried hibernate so i'm not sure if it works for me, but i can test in a little while after i've tried to fix FF 3.7 if you want since i can test with flash and html5 video/audio [07:19] drew212: probably have to close the lid and open it again if you're using a laptop [07:20] desktop =D [07:20] then i'm not sure, i've never used it :p [07:20] desktop FTW =) [07:20] i'll try, brb [07:30] ddecator: yeah, epic fail, and i had a boot fail, so i had to use my old 9.04 disk to get it to boot, once i used that i could boot from the hard disc =P [07:32] drew212: whoops...sorry :p [07:41] ddecator: my computer has a bunch of issues, booting is not one of its favorite parts... [07:41] thats why my uptime is huge sometimes... [07:42] drew212: haha, i just don't turn my comp off so it can fold [07:46] ddecator: yeah, i'm getting up there folding... [07:46] i haven't checked kakko in a while [07:47] neither have i.. [07:47] you're 197 o [07:47] i'm 161 [07:48] how many cycles/sec can you run? and how many cores? [07:49] hm, my PPD has gone down since i've had to do restarts and such with my comp..we can talk specifics in ##folding if you want :p [10:22] im having this problem allways since first time tryd ubuntu but it actually a bug. i just 4 min ago closed tab with flash video and still sound is comming from that video.. to what to report this bug? to flash installer? [11:11] Kangarooo: we can't do anything about (adobe) flash bugs, you'll need to report that to adobe and hope they care [11:14] ok tsimpson ill post to adobe page. but maybe its webkit related? couse maybe browser doesnt tell immidiatly that flash tab is closed? [11:14] it's possible, but I sometimes get that in FF too [11:14] it usually requires me to quite FF and start it again [11:14] -e [11:16] FF is using webkit and chrome uses webkit so of course u get that in FF [11:20] Kangarooo: no, FF uses gecko [11:22] Speaking of FF, I'm writing a bug on a SegFault with FF in combination with a java applet. Can someone remind me what command(s) run the applet independently, without FF, so I can see whether that also crashes? [11:23] probably just "java -jar whatever_it_is.jar" (guess) [11:24] tsimpson: I am thinking of somthing that you feed the html page address. [11:24] tsimpson: oh ok. im getting this flash error i talked about in FF. and thought that ive read somewhere everybrowser uses webkit. ok dont know that. chechink now in chrome and also in chrome i get some delay of sound cutting of after removing flash tab but not so long as FF.. [11:25] yes to open jar file thats correct command [11:25] chrome is the worst for it, because it runs flash as a separate process [11:26] edakiri: javaws? [11:26] tsimpson: I think not, but I will double check. perhaps it has been absorbed into javaws [11:27] What is the new URL for filing a bug with the web interface? [11:27] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/icedtea6-plugin/+filebug?no-redirect Did not work. [11:28] edakiri: it's openjdk-6, not icedtea6-plugin (it goes by source package, hence the +source) [11:29] tsimpson: Thanks. How can I see what the corresponding source package is for a given package? [11:29] apt-cache showsrc , look at the top line [11:30] or apt-cache showsrc | head -1, if you're lazy [11:30] and if you have deb-src lines [11:33] there's always http://packages.ubuntu.com/ if all else fails [11:52] the answer to previous Q: appletviewer [12:18] what is the URL or link to report bugs about launchpad itself? [12:22] aha. https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+filebug === bdrung__ is now known as bdrung === G is now known as Nigel [15:44] hello all [15:47] zus: hello [15:48] hi bencrisford how are you today? [15:48] zus: not bad thanks :) but not sure this is the right channel for chit chat :P #ubuntu-offtopic ? [15:49] i know. i was just saying hello being polite, not just loggin in [15:52] zus: ok awesome :) sorry if I seemed rude [15:53] bencrisford, you weren't and no worries... === yofel_ is now known as yofel [18:20] Hi! I think Bug #390372 status should be 'Won't Fix'. [18:20] Launchpad bug 390372 in gnome-terminal (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "default terminal does not have an effect (affects: 1) (heat: 7)" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/390372 [18:22] I don't understand why they set the status to 'Confirmed' [19:11] can i get a Won't Fix for bug 363326? thanks [19:11] Launchpad bug 363326 in linux (Ubuntu) (and 2 other projects) "Brightness control doesn't work on Amilo mini UI 3520 (affects: 5) (dups: 1) (heat: 40)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/363326 [20:28] DrKenobi: ping pedro when he get's back here, I don't quite understand him either, but maybe he meant that we could still do that ourselves without upstream. [20:29] yofel: ok, i'll do it. thanks! === easter_egg is now known as ayrton === vish is now known as MrAcosta === MrAcosta is now known as vish === ayrton is now known as easter_egg [22:58] ddecator: are you around? [23:02] anyone around to help me debug a bit? [23:31] drew212: debug what? [23:33] in firefox, it shows that i'm running flash 10.0, but in synaptic, it shows im running 10.1 [23:34] for bug 592658 i believe the user is experiencing the same problem(although it is unrelated to that specific bug report) [23:34] Launchpad bug 592658 in firefox (Ubuntu) "Firefox crashed using java (I suppose...) (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/592658 [23:36] hm, firefox shows flash as 10.1 here. (Using ffx 3.6.6~hg20100618r34325 from moz-daily-ppa and flash 10.1.53.64ubuntu1) [23:36] about:config shows differently for me =X [23:36] let me check, I looked in about:plugins [23:37] note: I'm running maverick currently [23:37] i'm running lucid =P [23:37] ill upload a screenshot, where is the easiest place to do that? [23:37] !paste [23:37] For posting multi-line texts into the channel, please use http://paste.ubuntu.com | To post !screenshots use http://tinyurl.com/imagebin | !pastebinit to paste directly from command line | Make sure you give us the URL for your paste - see also the channel topic. [23:39] lucid does have flash 10.1.53.64ubuntu0.10.04.1 in lucid-updates, so it is there... [23:40] http://imagebin.org/101912 [23:41] you can see on the right that my flash player is 10.1.53.64 in synaptic, but right under it, it shows shockwave flash 10.0 r22 [23:41] stupid question, but did you check if restarting firefox does anything? [23:41] sec [23:42] nope does nothing [23:44] it's not that important, but it makes debugging an issue if FF says it isn't running the latest version and the user has the latest version installed you know? [23:45] when you just checked did you make sure that it really exited firefox? [23:45] i did a sudo killall firefox-bin [23:46] would that be a full exit? [23:46] drew212: what does 'grep "10_1_53_64" /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer/libflashplayer.so' give you? [23:46] matches [23:46] what does locate libflashplayer.so say? [23:46] erm, ok, then you do have 10.1 installed [23:47] so i do have a problem? lol [23:48] do what penguin42 said [23:48] it should find 3 files [23:48] It wouldn't entirely surprise me if the rxx notation is just a different numbering scheme that overlaps with the 10.x.x.x numbering [23:49] it has 4 files [23:49] drew212: do you have a plugin file in ~/.mozilla/plugins? [23:49] http://paste.ubuntu.com/452218/ [23:49] flash shows as 10.1 r53 here [23:50] did you copy the file once? [23:50] you shouldn't have one in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins [23:50] not to my knowledge [23:51] there should be a symlink called flashplugin-alternative.so instead [23:51] thats greek to me =P [23:52] good: /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/flashplugin-alternative.so, bad: /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so [23:52] so how do i fix it? [23:53] just checking, are you 32 or 64 bit? [23:53] 64 [23:54] drew212: first, what does 'locate flashplugin-alternative.so' give you? [23:54] I seem to remember there is an nspluginwrapper -l or the like to list what it thought it's currently pointing to? (After you did the locate yofel asked for) [23:54] just to make sure they didn't change the packaging between lucid and maverick [23:55] oh, nice one, didn't know that [23:55] nspluginwrapper -l says ' Original plugin: /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer/libflashplayer.so' here [23:55] http://paste.ubuntu.com/452220/ that is what the nsplugin command yeilds [23:57] although, i dont really undestand what we're doing here =P [23:57] that looks right... [23:57] drew212: trying to find out why ffx shows the wrong plugin version? [23:57] drew212: Did you have a /usr/lib/mozilla/libflashplayer.so ? [23:57] he did [23:57] yes [23:58] if so then I think it's a question of whether it's using that one or the /usr/lib64/firefox/plugins/flashplugin-alternative.so [23:58] what does 'ls -l /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libflashplayer.so' give? [23:58] yofel: i know what we're trying to do, but idk what we're doing with these bash commands =P [23:58] http://paste.ubuntu.com/452224/ [23:59] yofel: i wish i knew what we were doing =P, i feel so incompetent. [23:59] 2009-02-02 is oviously the old plugin [23:59] well, ls -l gives you a long listing of a file, with permissions, dates etc. (see 'man ls') [23:59] yofel: didnt you say i shouldnt have that file in mozilla/plugins/*?