| === irvy is now known as irv | ||
| coz_ | hey guys...doesn anyone know if some of the lucid bugs are fixed in marverick yet?/ like wallapper options for dual monitors.... capablities for installing official nvidia drivers... nad right click unmount on mulitple paritions on external drives? | 01:50 |
|---|---|---|
| bjsnider | there's no lucid bug installing the nvidia driver | 01:51 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, mm I cant seem to install official nvidia drivers on lucid | 01:52 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, at least not withouth blacklisting neuveau | 01:52 |
| bjsnider | the nvidia installer won't work, but it has been disabled by canonical on purpose, so it doesn't wreck things. the nvidia driver is installable | 01:52 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, mm I will have to look into this then | 01:53 |
| bjsnider | install the recommended driver through jockey | 01:53 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, no | 01:53 |
| bjsnider | in the name of all that is right in the world | 01:53 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, the recommended driver has a memory leak | 01:53 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, nvidia-common is not a good version of the nvidia driver | 01:53 |
| bjsnider | nvidia-current | 01:54 |
| bjsnider | and it is the same driver | 01:54 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, right it is not a good driver | 01:54 |
| bjsnider | the libs and kernel module are pre-built | 01:54 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, I much prefer the official driver installation procedure to test different drivers | 01:54 |
| bjsnider | if it is not a good driver why do you want to install it? | 01:54 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, the need to install different version on different systems with different cards is essential for best performance | 01:55 |
| bjsnider | did you miss the nvidia sticky post about using the distribution packages? that is the official method | 01:55 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, limiting the choices to 2 orr 3 is not sensible | 01:55 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, I have been using ubuntu since day one | 01:55 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, I am not interested in the ubuntu version offered | 01:55 |
| coz_ | at least for nvidia drivers | 01:56 |
| bjsnider | http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=d39db399e4674fd731f185191ed48396&t=72490 | 01:56 |
| bjsnider | the very first sentence says use the distribution's packages | 01:57 |
| coz_ | bjsnider, yeah I have never had issues with updates | 01:57 |
| yofel | any reason why we can't ship a few more versions? | 01:58 |
| yofel | It's not like we're actually fixing bugs in the drivers | 01:58 |
| coz_ | without the ability to install official nvidia drivers ..ubuntu becomes useless in my circimstance because I need to test drivers for clients machines | 01:59 |
| coz_ | and I never use the ones offered by ubuntu | 02:00 |
| coz_ | rather I never install via jockey | 02:00 |
| coz_ | this works but creates problems down the road http://www.ubuntugeek.com/howto-install-nvidia-drivers-manually-on-ubuntu-10-04-lucid-lynx.html | 02:02 |
| Dink | Does the Unity doc on the left have a config file one can edit to add custom application/launcher ? | 02:24 |
| Dink | I have several wine application I would like to put there | 02:29 |
| bjsnider | yofel_, it is not too hard to package additional version of the blob, just go ahead and set up a ppa and toos them in there. but lucid already includes the 195 and the x-updates ppa has the 256, so i don't know what the point would be | 04:19 |
| === Jordan_U_ is now known as Jordan_U | ||
| === Jordan_U_ is now known as Jordan_U | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| === Fudge is now known as Guest5778 | ||
| === Fudgey is now known as Fudge | ||
| Fudge | whens alpha2 scheduled? | 07:49 |
| SwedeMike | 10 days ago. | 07:50 |
| Fudge | alpha3 im sorry lol im using alpha2 :$ | 07:51 |
| SwedeMike | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickReleaseSchedule | 07:51 |
| Fudge | ty | 07:52 |
| Fudge | ok 14 August cheers for that | 07:53 |
| Fudge | any idea how to recompile vmware modules on maverick? | 08:10 |
| Vigo | Fudge: Sorry , I do not do much VM stuff. | 08:12 |
| Fudge | Vigo thanks anyway | 08:23 |
| om26er | is there any shorkey for preferences in thunderbrid (not using it) | 10:20 |
| joejoe | hi, i am not able to upgrade properly to the maverick, the update fails with following message http://pastebin.com/m8SgTagg | 12:56 |
| === jtechidna is now known as JontheEchidna | ||
| === Yahweh is now known as poutine | ||
| dholbach | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek starting in 12 minutes in #ubuntu-classroom | 16:48 |
| djbeenie_ | anyone know of a linux live cd that will grab all the hd information, how many core procs, HD's and size, memory and so on and on? | 16:49 |
| Pici | djbeenie_: That question is more on-topic for ##linux | 16:49 |
| LucidFox | Okay | 17:00 |
| LucidFox | something is definitely wrong with my GTK | 17:00 |
| LucidFox | after upgrade | 17:00 |
| LucidFox | half the widgets are white | 17:00 |
| LucidFox | Buttons are always white no matter which theme I try | 17:01 |
| LucidFox | Any ideas, or am I better off doing a clean reinstall? | 17:02 |
| LucidFox | Hmmm | 17:12 |
| LucidFox | For once, I'm tempted to try the 64-bit version | 17:12 |
| LucidFox | after spending almost five years on 32-bit | 17:13 |
| LucidFox | since I'll be doing a clean reinstall anyway | 17:13 |
| LucidFox | I wonder also | 17:17 |
| LucidFox | can 64-bit Wine run both 32-bit and 64-bit Windows applications? | 17:17 |
| LucidFox | or at least just 32-bit? | 17:18 |
| skydrome | just wanted to see what ff4 looked like and got this | 17:20 |
| skydrome | /usr/bin/firefox-4.0: 175: Syntax error: end of file unexpected (expecting "fi") | 17:20 |
| yofel | oh 4.0 is there? | 17:26 |
| yofel | ah, updating package manager is fun... 'sudo aptitude install aptitude' XD | 17:28 |
| * yofel goes installing ffx4 | 17:29 | |
| billybigrigger | yofel, installing from mozilla daily? | 17:31 |
| yofel | yep | 17:31 |
| skydrome | 4.0b2 is the version, havent tried 4.0b1 dont really care that much | 17:34 |
| yofel | skydrome: about that error, open /usr/bin/firefox-4.0 in an editor, and add a new line containing 'fi' at the bottom | 17:40 |
| yofel | and: | 17:41 |
| yofel | <Hanmac> i can not start the /usr/bin/firefox-4.0 because someone miss a "fi" | 17:41 |
| yofel | <micahg> Hanmac: yes, the builds are being respun to fix that | 17:41 |
| skydrome | excellent :) | 17:41 |
| skydrome | but still not launching | 17:42 |
| yofel | it does here | 17:45 |
| skydrome | it did the profile transfer but never launched | 17:47 |
| yofel | meh, http://yofel.dyndns.org/pics/ext/ffx4_addons0.png :( | 17:49 |
| h00k | So, the daily maverick installer on my netbook is hosed :( | 18:27 |
| h00k | well, the installer worked okay, but it is reporting everything as crashing once at the desktop | 18:27 |
| Dink | When I try to run a wine app after it has been placed in the unity "doc" I get the following in my logs "kernel: [65468.497241] Skipping EDID probe due to cached edid" and it never starts | 18:36 |
| yofel | h00k: even that apport crashed? if yes then that's known | 18:36 |
| charlie-tca | h00k: Seems to be an issue today. I have so many apport crashes, it is unusable | 18:36 |
| yofel | fix underway | 18:36 |
| yofel | bug 603919 | 18:37 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 603919 in apport (Ubuntu) ""python packages" crashed with ImportError in <module>()" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/603919 | 18:37 |
| h00k | Yeah, it's...phew. I am wondering if I should hang on and grab updates if I can, or just daily install when that's fixed | 18:38 |
| Dink | I had the same issue it was barely useable. I grabbed the d-i and used it to install netbook. | 18:39 |
| yofel | h00k: can you install 'gir1.0-glib-2.0' and see if that helps? | 18:39 |
| Dink | yofel, after that installation things have been better. I noticed it in todays update. | 18:40 |
| yofel | ah, so it's already out, good :) | 18:40 |
| h00k | yofel: I'll check that now. | 18:40 |
| Dink | I do notice though at times things hang a bit when I go between the application menu and main screen | 18:41 |
| yofel | h00k: or simply update python-gobject, that will pull it in | 18:41 |
| uga | yofel: remember the qt webkit thingie? | 18:43 |
| yofel | yes | 18:44 |
| uga | strange thing is that I have another box with karmik+ppa. Same numbered packages were updated... | 18:44 |
| uga | ... and it all went smooth. It seems ppa packages were linked against webkit beta1 | 18:44 |
| h00k | yofel: doing python-gobject now | 18:44 |
| h00k | Also, on this reinstall, btrfs seems to be working smoothly. it didn't take 12 hours to install. | 18:44 |
| Dink | Another thing I have a javaws app that does not show up on the doc when it is ran. Is that normal? | 18:44 |
| yofel | h00k: does btrfs work with grub2 now? | 18:45 |
| h00k | yofel: I don't know, I just made a 200mb /boot with ext2 | 18:45 |
| h00k | i could try it! | 18:45 |
| * h00k boots from USB | 18:46 | |
| uga | oh ,is it stable already? (btrfs support) | 18:46 |
| uga | I mean at least upstream, I don't mean in the distro | 18:46 |
| * h00k shrugs | 18:47 | |
| uga | lolz | 18:47 |
| yofel | IIRC it was supposed to be not experimental anymore in 2.6.35, not sure if that's actually the case | 18:48 |
| uga | h00k: I don't want to go the reiser4 way. I've had reiser4 partitions for a while, and see now... | 18:48 |
| h00k | uga: they've come back to kill you? | 18:48 |
| h00k | s/kill/haunt/ | 18:48 |
| yofel | then again, ext4 wasn't experimental in jaunty too... | 18:48 |
| * yofel shudders... | 18:48 | |
| uga | h00k: almost. Now that the guy went to prison, nobody wanted to develop anymore, and the fact that it was never fully accepted by the kernel people... | 18:49 |
| uga | so I wanted to know if they already accepted btrfs as something working and "complete" ;) | 18:49 |
| h00k | As far as I know, it was supposed to be that way, as yofel said | 18:49 |
| uga | thanks, then it's good enough for me | 18:50 |
| uga | yofel: I've been using ext4 for quite a while here | 18:50 |
| uga | and I migrated everything to it as soon as I figured out how to make grub work on it | 18:50 |
| uga | it's called "backups" :P | 18:51 |
| h00k | okay, going through the installer | 18:52 |
| h00k | "Your root file system is a btrfs file system. This is not supported by the boot loader used by default by this installer. You should use a small /boot partition with another file system, such as ext3." | 18:54 |
| h00k | yofel: ^ | 18:54 |
| yofel | ok, thanks | 18:54 |
| mirak | I created an init script for a daemon that is not supposed to run as root. this dameon creates a pidfile in /var/run/foo.pid . Since /var/run should be only writtable by root, can I touch the file and chown it in the init script before start ? | 18:55 |
| uga | mirak: wouldnt' it have been easier by just touch, su to another user and ask? =) | 19:14 |
| uga | btw, yes, it should work (tm) | 19:14 |
| uga | but you won't be able to delete the file | 19:15 |
| uga | s/and/thank | 19:15 |
| uga | urgh | 19:15 |
| uga | s/and/than | 19:15 |
| * uga notes his english is getting worse, worse, worse, worse... | 19:16 | |
| cixa | anyone have any tips on what thinkpad i should get? i have looked at the x301 and the t410. i run maverick now on an r51 | 19:21 |
| jpds | x301s. | 19:22 |
| mirak | uga, what ? | 19:22 |
| uga | mirak: you asked if you could create a file under /var/run and later be writeable by a script running by another user, right? | 19:23 |
| uga | I said the answer is yes, but it'd have been quicker if you just tested ;) | 19:23 |
| uga | (or so I intended to write, in a very poor english) | 19:23 |
| uga | just that, the script won't be able to delete it, if not run as root | 19:24 |
| mirak | uga, seems the right way is to create a folder writable by the user | 19:24 |
| mirak | touch && chown works too | 19:25 |
| mirak | I did that | 19:25 |
| uga | the other option is setuid, but I never liked that | 19:25 |
| yofel | cixa: that's more something for #ubuntu-offtopic, I'm using an t510 right now (my r61 broke :/ ) | 19:26 |
| uga | mirak: not sure but I think it'd have been much harder using policykit | 19:26 |
| uga | ? | 19:26 |
| Daijoubu | guys i get an error when i try to update | 19:29 |
| Daijoubu | http://pastebin.com/JsUhvPyS | 19:30 |
| Daijoubu | can someone help please :) | 19:32 |
| uga | Daijoubu: sounds like somebody forgot updating python-minimal in that mirror | 19:33 |
| uga | there's no much you can do, I think, until somebody updates that | 19:33 |
| Daijoubu | ok i will switch to the main server | 19:33 |
| uga | as far as the package version is there, ys | 19:33 |
| uga | es | 19:33 |
| Daijoubu | weird... software sources doesn't want to start now | 19:35 |
| mirak | uga, ? it runs as root, so i guess it can work ... | 19:41 |
| mirak | uga, I mean init.d is launched by root | 19:41 |
| Daijoubu | uga thanks that worked :) | 19:52 |
| bp0 | when is launchpad going to be fixed | 20:17 |
| Pici | bp0: If its broken, then #lauchpad would be a good place to talk about it. | 20:25 |
| bp0 | you'd think that | 20:27 |
| ripps | hmmm... new cairo is out. Let's hope it fixes some crap instead of making it worse. | 21:07 |
| * penguin42 gently wonders about bringing my main desktop upto maverick | 21:15 | |
| duffy | Srsly | 21:19 |
| * charlie-tca will upgrade next week to maverick on his main system | 21:19 | |
| * penguin42 has put a squid on it so that all my updates on my VM are getting cached through it, and hopefully my other machine will | 21:22 | |
| duffy | why next week, whats happening next week..its still gonna be alpha . | 21:23 |
| charlie-tca | Next week is after Ubuntu Developer Week | 21:23 |
| duffy | well I wouldnt, personally.. | 21:23 |
| charlie-tca | I can break it then | 21:23 |
| yofel | next week is that magical somewhere in the middle of devel time point where things start to get worse :P | 21:24 |
| charlie-tca | yup | 21:24 |
| charlie-tca | but it is my time | 21:24 |
| penguin42 | having said that I'm off this week, which means I can either break it and see it, or it means I do have a chance to fix it | 21:25 |
| charlie-tca | heh | 21:25 |
| Vigo | Can I safely remove kernel 2.6.35-6.9 or should I keep it in for testing and bug squishing? | 21:26 |
| penguin42 | Vigo: If you run the janitor it should clean out all but the last one or two | 21:27 |
| Vigo | penguin42: Thank you. | 21:28 |
| guntbert | Vigo: always keep at least a 2nd working kernel | 21:28 |
| Vigo | guntbert: Yes, and always make a backup BEFORE doing such stuff,,,, | 21:29 |
| penguin42 | anyone running lubuntu in maverick? I've just had it do something *very* odd | 21:29 |
| Vigo | I am trying all sorts of packages and such in this testing,,,, | 21:30 |
| Vigo | penguin42: I have not run Lubuntu yet on this box, what occurred? | 21:32 |
| guntbert | Vigo: choosing another kernel is not really an issue to threaten your system - but for trying a lot I'd recommend a virtualization environment (virtual box,...) | 21:32 |
| penguin42 | Vigo: Well it's logged in, but when I started a terminal the terminal appeared in the middle of the screen and slowly moved down until it went off the bottom, and the panel is now constantly flickering - very odd | 21:32 |
| Vigo | guntbert: I agree, I am using 3 HDDs all some flavor of *nix on each. | 21:33 |
| Vigo | penguin42: That is odd, any reports of that issue on the LXDE site? | 21:34 |
| penguin42 | not checked yet | 21:34 |
| Vigo | penguin42: On one of the Linux Forums there is a report of that, is a Xorg thing, still looking though... | 21:36 |
| penguin42 | Vigo: URL? It does seem repeatable | 21:36 |
| Vigo | penguin42: Is an OpenBox WM also,, | 21:38 |
| Vigo | but here> http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-newbie-8/resizing-virtualbox-with-lxde-inside-doesnt-restretch-wallpaper-741903/ | 21:39 |
| penguin42 | Vigo: What makes you say that sounds anything like what I just described? | 21:40 |
| penguin42 | that seems to be corruption or wallpaper related | 21:40 |
| Vigo | penguin42: I am running Debian 5 on one drive, LXDE, Crunchbag and other WMs on it, I have not yet had that error or issue ,,still looking | 21:43 |
| Vigo | penguin42: This may shed some light on it: http://wiki.lxde.org/en/LXTerminal | 21:45 |
| penguin42 | no, it's a bug, not a feature of LXTerminal | 21:46 |
| yofel | penguin42: doesn't happen on my eeePC | 21:46 |
| penguin42 | yofel: Hmm curiours | 21:47 |
| Vigo | penguin42: Line 6 of LXDE site may explain it a bit: http://blog.lxde.org/?p=739 | 21:47 |
| penguin42 | no, it doesn't | 21:48 |
| Vigo | They did a sweet rewrite of the site, | 21:49 |
| Vigo | penguin42: Are you using Alltray with it? | 21:52 |
| penguin42 | not that I know | 21:53 |
| Vigo | penguin42: Have you hacked the XPanel at all? | 21:55 |
| penguin42 | no, please stop guessing! | 21:56 |
| Vigo | Time to make a fresh backup. have a great time. | 22:01 |
| penguin42 | that's now bug 604797 | 22:05 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 604797 in lubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "[maverick] windows move off the bottom of the display and then the panel flickers" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/604797 | 22:05 |
| penguin42 | I classify that as one of the weirdest ones I've seen for a long time | 22:06 |
| billybigrigger | bash: /etc/bash_completion.d/apt.backup: line 32: syntax error near unexpected token `;' | 23:23 |
| billybigrigger | anyone still affected by this bug with an up to date system? | 23:24 |
| billybigrigger | i thought this bug was resolved along time ago | 23:24 |
| penguin42 | yeh, not seen it for ages | 23:26 |
| yofel | billybigrigger: apt.backup doesn't belong to any package | 23:28 |
| billybigrigger | i've got syntax errors on lines 32 and 33 | 23:31 |
| billybigrigger | not sure which is the offending character though | 23:31 |
| yofel | my guess is that it's a file left by dpkg for some reason (bug?), as it shouldn't be there | 23:33 |
| billybigrigger | http://pastebin.ca/1899381 | 23:33 |
| yofel | dpkg does things like backing up files and creating new ones with .dpkg-new extensions etc. when upgrading packages | 23:33 |
| yofel | billybigrigger: I believe you, just delete the file | 23:34 |
| billybigrigger | apt.backup should be safe to rm then? | 23:34 |
| billybigrigger | alright | 23:34 |
| yofel | /etc/bash_completion.d/apt is the right one | 23:34 |
| billybigrigger | yofel, thanks | 23:34 |
| * penguin42 is now curious what created that .backup, it would be a really bad idea to do that automatically in a config directory like that | 23:35 | |
| * penguin42 wonders if you ever edited with <insert favorite editor here> | 23:35 | |
| tj83 | maybe i am just ignorantly missing something here...... I have a SD card with some python scripts on it, under no circumstances have I been able to give execution permission on the files. why? | 23:38 |
| penguin42 | tj83: I think automatically mounted disks mounted by users are probably mounted noexec (but that's a guess) | 23:38 |
| penguin42 | as a 2nd guess they're probably vfat and I'm not sure they store flags like that | 23:39 |
| tj83 | even sudo chmod +x file wont change it/ | 23:39 |
| tj83 | as root | 23:39 |
| tj83 | oh, that makes sense, its fat for sure. | 23:39 |
| tj83 | penguin42, here's a catch, I just pop'd the sd card into this laptop running lucid, the x flags are set. its just maverick | 23:42 |
| penguin42 | curious | 23:42 |
| tj83 | very | 23:42 |
| penguin42 | I'd compare the /proc/mounts from the two | 23:42 |
| tj83 | penguin42, i'm no linux expert, can you help with that? http://www.pastebin.ca/1899394 | 23:50 |
| tj83 | whats this tag? "showexec" | 23:51 |
| * penguin42 looks | 23:51 | |
| yofel | showexec | 23:51 |
| yofel | If set, the execute permission bits of the file will be allowed only if the extension part of the name is .EXE, .COM, or .BAT. Not set by default. | 23:51 |
| yofel | so we have the culprit | 23:52 |
| tj83 | yofel, awesome | 23:52 |
| yofel | tj83: that's from the mount manpage ;) | 23:52 |
| penguin42 | what an odd option | 23:52 |
| tj83 | now how do we kill that for default behavior. and why on earth would they include .exe!?! >< | 23:52 |
| penguin42 | tj83: so on the old one it's just marking everything execute (because there is actually no way to express execute sensibly on fat) | 23:52 |
| yofel | well, vfat is for windows originally, so .exe makes sense | 23:52 |
| penguin42 | yofel: Well I guess if you're going to do wine, but I'd agree the old option actually makes more sense given that it's not just windows stuff on usb sticks these days | 23:53 |
| yofel | depends, maybe they thought it makes sense from some security point of view, and you can always use a different file system | 23:54 |
| tj83 | so, someone gonna make it easy for me how to kill this showexec bit or am I gonna have to look it up myself o.O | 23:54 |
| yofel | tj83: I'm thinking, can't remember where that's set though | 23:54 |
| tj83 | the portability is the ONLY reason to keep vfat | 23:55 |
| penguin42 | yofel: If the .exe's and .bat's are executable I don't see the security benefit | 23:55 |
| tj83 | penguin42, i will side with you. but we roll with the punches. | 23:55 |
| yofel | penguin42: actually, nautilus asks you what to do with executable files iirc, you don't want that for documents usually.. | 23:56 |
| penguin42 | tj83: Well, it would be worth tracking down what caused it to change and see if there was a rational or whether it was accidental | 23:56 |
| penguin42 | yofel: True | 23:56 |
| tj83 | penguin42, this is a brand spank new install of maverick, its something the developers chose. | 23:56 |
| tj83 | nothing has been modified by me the user, i just slapped this sd card in from the laptop i was using under lucid, there it worked fine. seems together we have found the cause, just not the solution yet. | 23:57 |
| penguin42 | tj83: Well, be careful - someone might have chosen it, they might not have fully figured out why or if it was a good default | 23:57 |
| tj83 | my personal machine.... nobody else has touched it, and this installation of the os is less than 24 hrs old. | 23:58 |
| yofel | tj83: it's a change of default settings, which - if my guess above is right - actually is a benifit for many users | 23:59 |
| tj83 | I expect this behavior could be observed by anyone with maverick and a SD card. | 23:59 |
| penguin42 | tj83: No, I mean don't always assume directors have fully thought about it - if they did there would be no bugs! | 23:59 |
| * yofel goes searching for a flash drive that actually has vfat on it... | 23:59 | |
| tj83 | penguin42, :) fair enough | 23:59 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
