[00:25] paultag: you're supposed to have a package training session now [00:26] paultag: according to classbot it started 26 minutes ago :) [00:39] off-by-one virtuald :) [00:40] it's on sunday last I was told [00:40] unless... [00:40] crap, brb, food's burning [00:44] paultag: twitter and google calendar says it's now :p [00:44] google is all knowing [00:44] yeah [00:45] the closest thing to a god we have [01:36] shoot! [02:44] hi all [02:44] can i ask something [02:45] recent ubuntu updates destroyed my bitcoin miner program [02:45] it uses python a bit, and mostly opencl. With amd stream sdk, and closed source drivers. [02:45] Im trying to debug this... [02:46] - how to get packages as I had them 5 days ago? i.e. I know what packages I want to downgrade, now how to find out the version and do it? [02:47] - btw how to know exact gfx driver in use, and version of fglrx, and of catalyst drivers (radeon)? [02:49] some icons in the taskbar and the avatars in skype are broken, sometimes they are not (i`m using kubuntu) [05:42] nisshh: no need to move 'new' bugs, only the triaged and inprogress , maybe the confirmed ones at times.. milestone the bugs only when you feel they are papercuts === Nigel is now known as G === bilalakhtar is now known as bilal_ === bilal_ is now known as bilalakhtar [11:31] anyone have text disappearing in natty? [11:35] devildante: which text? [11:36] lemme explain [11:37] when logging in to gnome, the wallpaper + panels appears like usual, but any text on them doesn't [11:37] worse, ANY text from any window or dialog doesn't appear [11:38] (-> #ubuntu+1) [11:39] but I only heard of the panels not coming up at all, not yet that they appear but without text o.O [11:41] yofel: not only the panels, everything that has text on it [11:41] that includes terminal, menus, etc [11:41] no idea, I'm using KDE which works fine in natty [11:41] ah === yofel_ is now known as yofel [13:46] o/ [13:47] \o/ [15:11] I think bug 678125 should probably be set to wishlist [15:11] Launchpad bug 678125 in openoffice.org (Ubuntu) "No A6 format preset in 'page' dialog (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/678125 [15:13] I take it that is a different paper size; like letter, legal, A4? [15:13] yeh [15:14] Never heard of A6 before, myself. I agree with wishlist, though. will set it [15:14] charlie-tca: It's one of the sequence of ISO paper sizes; they go smaller as you get a larger number; i.e. a6 is smaller than a5 is smaller than a4 [15:14] charlie-tca: http://www.ukofficedirect.co.uk/iso_paper_size_cp.aspx [15:15] Probably needs to go upstream, too [15:15] set it to wishlist [15:16] I can upstream it [15:17] I've never actually had a use for A6 that I can think of, A3,A4 and A5 are quite common [15:19] hehe, I've just found an upstream bug which fixed i t - last week even though it had been open for ~4 years [15:25] * penguin42 reads the wikipedia page on paper sizes and learns a whole bunch of probably useless info [15:29] thanks, penguin42. [15:46] can someone set importance on bug 677955 - I suggest low [15:46] Launchpad bug 677955 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "Grub 1.98 crashes with command 'help b' (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/677955 [15:49] Why is that even valid? I would think most commands if run by the alphabet will crash on some letters [15:50] Or, does every crash mean it is a bug? [15:52] help b should display help on the b commands [15:53] help should never crash [15:53] yeah? Okay, triaged and low [15:54] My new item learned today! Thanks [15:54] charlie-tca: A command might tell you that a parameter is invalid or if the parameter is something like an address then it could do something evil, but in general it shouldn't hang the machine [15:55] I agree with that. I did not know that help (letter) would display help for that letters commands. does that work everywhere or just in grub? [15:56] * charlie-tca hates the grub command line thingy [15:56] help is a grub command [15:56] bash also has it [15:57] heh, Thanks so very much. I tend to even reinstall if it is a fresh install dropping me to the grub command line. [15:58] I preferred old-grub1 but grub command line can get you out of one hell of a mess [15:59] I suppose it can, I just try really hard not to use it [16:01] it's got tab complete and stuff so it's not too bad - especially compared to what Grub1 setup was like in the early days [16:02] (Anyone who understands Chinese might like to take a look at bug 677841 - google translate doesn't do a very good job) [16:02] Launchpad bug 677841 in empathy (Ubuntu) "無法顯示名子,只顯示帳號 (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Low,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/677841 [16:03] Might be a good one to try the "convert to a question so it can be translated" thing [16:03] indeed, it's the new, proposed workflow [16:03] well it's already got a forum discussion associated with it [16:04] Still needs to be translated, though, right? [16:04] I still don't think it's worth an effort but meh, I'm not going to translate it myself :) [16:04] penguin42: forum discussion is also in Taiwanese [16:45] when will the new pidgin be uploaded? [17:07] new? [17:08] mortal: to natty, as soon as someone have time to do that. to previous releases never, unless you count in backports (in which case it's the same as natty - as soon as someone asks for it and developers have time to prepare a backport) [17:14] on ubuntu, how to check installed fglrx version? [17:14] remind me, does ubuntu pull from sid or testing ? [17:15] debian guy thinks ubuntu sucks because dpkg can't even say what fglrx version it is, and debian does. version like 10.09 drivers etc [17:16] what's the debian guy on? dpkg will show you the version of your package? [17:17] yeah but it shows stupid version, like [17:18] 2:8.780-0ubuntu2 [17:18] and why's that stupid? [17:18] well debian says [17:18] fglrx-driver 1:10-10-1 [17:19] which is much more informative, because it refers to ATI's upstream version number (10.10) which is important in debugging etc with AMD/Ati [17:20] and here on Ubuntu if some Ati guys asks "what drivers you use, 10.10 or 10.9" I can't say [17:20] hmm [17:22] 10.9 = 8.771 10.10 = 8.783 [17:22] and I don't think it's that out of date [17:22] xelister: It should show the version in /var/log/Xorg.0.log anyway when you try and run it [17:23] ubuntu uses some strange version between officiall 10.9 and 10.10 (other guys say, probobly they are right) why not just ship 10.10 based driver then (and btw, name it like, 2:8.780-0ubuntu2-catalyst-10-10-based or something) [17:23] Im on maverick [17:24] I don't know the mechanics of how it gets packages - you could try #ubuntu-x [17:24] xelister: However you might get further if you don't say it sucks; even if it isn't clear! [17:26] well I was toning down what he said lol [17:26] hehe [17:26] anyhow, on #bitcoin-dev there are often interesting discussion about GFX hardware, also on linuxes and ubuntu. bbl [17:50] xelister: penguin42, we got a pre-release version of the AMD driver to ship with [17:50] micahg: Yeh makes sense; so why the weird numbering? [17:51] penguin42: it's a pre-release version [17:52] micahg: But I think what xelister is pointing is that the numbering doesn't look even similar tot eh ati numbering; the current ati numbering is 10.x [17:52] micahg: that means we only had pre-release versions? I can't remember the package ever having a logical version number [17:52] penguin42: no, that's the catalyst version, not the fglrx version [17:53] xelister: you should probably go to #ubuntu-x and ask Sarvatt. IIRC he makes the packages for the x-updates ppa so he should know where the numbers are from [17:53] yofel: huh?, no just for maverick we got the prerelease so we could ship with KMS for ATI AFAIK [17:53] micahg: Ah there was only one number visible on the ATI website to casual inspection [17:54] micahg: ah, I didn't know there was a difference between catalyst and fglrx, I always assumed they're the same [17:54] most people that asked about ati ususally didn't make much of a difference there [17:58] then again, why do the debian folks use the catalyst version for the fglrx package then... [17:59] great, viewing the ati homepage crashed ffx4.. [18:00] micahg: by the way... about the mozilla crash reporter: Just adding a comment what I was doing and sending the report is fine? [18:01] yofel: yep [18:01] yofel: we're working on getting access to those upstream crash reports as well in case there's an Ubuntu specific issue [18:08] krusader seems to be totall crap [18:09] it crashes. always. for long time. [18:09] will anyone ever fix it [18:09] crashed again, as usuall, when closing some tab [18:09] xelister: have you used the KDE crash reporting tool? [18:11] yeah I will. probably will not help anything. [18:11] also bugs there where reported many many times since always [18:11] same bugs [18:48] hi can someone look at bug 65821 and tell me if they agree that it is not a dupe of 595321 ? [18:48] Launchpad bug 65821 in mutt (Ubuntu) "edgy beta - mutt sasl authentication broken (heat: 2)" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/65821 [18:48] try that again [18:48] bug 658521 [18:48] Launchpad bug 658521 in mountall (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "In Live session or installation HD not recognized (dup-of: 595321)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/658521 [18:48] Launchpad bug 595321 in linux (Ubuntu) "Sata drives not detected by 2.6.35.* kernels (affects: 6) (dups: 1) (heat: 54)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/595321 [18:48] that's better [18:49] It is a linux bug. We do not mark any bugs against the kernel as duplicates [18:49] You need to have the kernel team review it for that. #ubuntu-kernel [18:49] charlie-tca: Indeed - I think what confused it was that 658521 wasn't marked as Linux [18:50] you can't tell who marked it as a dupe can you? [18:50] (If it was one of the kernel guys I wouldn't undupe it - otherwise I think I should) [18:51] you can - full activity log (I think that's njin) [18:51] 2010-10-30 12:49:03 Fabio Marconi marked as duplicate 595321 [18:51] njin [18:51] isn't it? [18:51] it is [18:52] ok, I'll flip it to Linux and undupe it [18:54] :( [18:58] Thanks again, penguin42. That was a good find [18:58] someone on +1 seems to have the same controller === tux_race1 is now known as tux_racer [23:15] lifeless: why shouldnt it be a bug on launchpad that launchpad is giving an incorrect command to users? [23:15] maco: launchpad doesn't give that command [23:16] maco: its just data configured by the ubuntu bug squad [23:16] maco: also, its an ubuntu bug if they changed things incompatibly with their own messages [23:17] well then the package would be apport [23:17] perhaps [23:17] but how does the message on lp get changed? [23:18] just edit it [23:20] I may be wrong, but I really wouldn't expect this to be code rather than data. [23:21] edit it where? [23:22] I guess an ubuntu project owner has to set it or something like that? [23:23] what's the issue? [23:24] the "please use ubuntu-bug" message on lp gives a deprecated syntax for how to use it [23:24] maco: where? [23:24] this one [23:24] xterm (Ubuntu) bug reporting guidelines: [23:24] Please report bugs against xterm with this command: [23:24] $ ubuntu-bug -p xterm [23:24] For more tips on effective bug reporting against Ubuntu Xorg packages, please see http://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Reporting and thanks ahead of time! [23:24] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xterm/+filebug [23:25] yeah, we can edit that [23:26] maco: in summary: data in launchpad isn't a bug of launchpad itself. [23:27] is there a better place to report such bugs than the blackhole of no-package-set? [23:28] I don't know [23:29] Is there a meta place for bugs about ubuntu itself: governance issues, TB issues etc. [23:32] speaking of bug stuff [23:33] anyone got an answer for the last question in bug 677558 [23:33] Launchpad bug 677558 in launchpad "launchpad chooses package fglrx-installer when reporting a bug for package fglrx (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/677558 [23:38] lifeless: yes, there is a way. [23:38] I don't how practical it is or how to implement it though. [23:38] I can use https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+search to search for any package, binary or source. [23:39] If it is a binary package, it will give me the source it is in [23:41] Since launchpad bugs are always filed against source packages, searching for fglrx shows me fglrx-installer as the package affected [23:48] charlie-tca: yeah, but how can we communicate better with users that don't know this structure [23:49] Education? [23:49] We need to educate the users either through classes or documentation. [23:51] perhaps we need to review the procedures we (bug triagers) use. Why do we insist on telling the reporter "you made a mistake. The package should have been..." instead of just changing it to the correct package [23:52] The reporter should be able to tell us "this is a bug I found." Part of triaging is to insure the package is correct. The reporter did not make a mistake.