[01:00] <layn> Hi!
[12:04] <pedro_> hey folks, I'm designing the mentor reporting template, did i miss anything? http://paste.ubuntu.com/538616/
[12:24] <vish> pedro_: how many bugs? or list of bugs?
[12:25] <vish> ah, well.. we could just gmane it :)
[12:26] <vish> pedro_: when exactly to use the template?  dint we abandon the mentorship and start with the mentor group?
[12:28] <pedro_> vish, this is more to report to the bugsquad/mentorship admin team so we can know what is the mentor/student doing
[12:28] <pedro_> vish, we can start using it for the next bugsquad meeting
[12:28] <vish> ah...
[12:29] <pedro_> vish, right, with the mentor group you'll have students anyways, and  we need some info about how are they doing it :-)
[12:45] <vish> yay! i got 3 banshee bugs before kamusin got to them !! ;p
[12:45] <vish> no wait 4!
[12:48] <kamusin> vish, \o/ heee
[13:22] <Psi-Jack> Alright, I'm trying to look into the issue that's a serious lsb-init bug still existant in Ubuntu 10.04.1 regarding status_of_proc, and I'm wondering if anyone here knows about it and if there's any bugs relating directly to it.
[13:53] <charlie-tca> seb128, bug 683361
[13:53] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683361 in compiz (Ubuntu) "compiz crashed with SIGSEGV in radeon_bo_get_tiling() (affects: 1) (heat: 10)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683361
[13:53] <charlie-tca> changed to public with the coredump attached?
[13:54] <Psi-Jack> Okay.. So, what's up with the bug tracker, I'm trying to link a bug to another bug, and it's telling me https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot/+bug/683650 is a bug in a remote bug tracker, trying to link it for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lsb/+bug/683640
[13:54] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683650 in dovecot (Ubuntu) "status_of_proc is returning incorrect error code (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New]
[13:56] <seb128> charlie-tca, yes?
[13:56] <seb128> charlie-tca, not sure if that's a question
[13:56] <charlie-tca> I thought you never take bugs from private to public with the coredump
[13:57] <seb128> why not?
[13:57] <seb128> well it's never done automatically
[13:57] <charlie-tca> seb128, private data in the dump
[13:57] <seb128> but compiz doesn't hold user datas so I don't see the issue
[13:57] <charlie-tca> I see. Okay
[13:57] <charlie-tca> Psi-Jack, trying to link them how?
[13:57] <seb128> well in fact the bug made the retracer crash
[13:58] <seb128> so I made it public to easy debugging
[13:58] <seb128> it's going to be retraced and cleaned rsn
[13:58] <Psi-Jack> charlie-tca: Still an error.
[13:58] <seb128> I didn't see an issue with making a compiz dump public for a bit
[13:58] <seb128> since it doesn't hold any datas
[13:58] <charlie-tca> Ouch. I guess that does matter. Just trying to make sure I understand
[13:58] <Psi-Jack> charlie-tca: Oh..
[13:58] <charlie-tca> Psi-Jack, they could be duplicates of each other, but they are both reported against ubuntu
[13:59] <Psi-Jack> charlie-tca: On https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lsb/+bug/683640, I click on "Also affects project"
[13:59] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683640 in lsb (Ubuntu) "status_of_proc is returning incorrect error code (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New]
[13:59] <charlie-tca> Psi-Jack, they are not upstream at all. They are both local ubuntu bugs
[14:00] <charlie-tca> If one is a duplicate of the other, just use "Mark as duplicate" in the upper right
[14:00] <Psi-Jack> It's not a duplicate. I made them both.
[14:00] <Psi-Jack> One is for lsb, one is for dovecot being effected by bugs in lsb.
[14:00] <charlie-tca> Then you just comment on them
[14:00] <charlie-tca> They are both in ubuntu, though. You can't link them as projects of each other.
[14:01] <charlie-tca> Thanks, seb128
[14:02] <charlie-tca> Psi-Jack, normally, you would just comment on each one that bug ??? is related to this issue
[14:03] <Psi-Jack> Gotcha.. Not sure how launchpad works, but not liking it, but eh well. ;)
[14:03] <njin> ara: hello 20101201 amd64 still without panels
[14:03] <njin> bug 683403
[14:03] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683403 in gnome-session (Ubuntu) "natty 20101130.1 without panel (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683403
[14:04] <charlie-tca> njin, If you don't have the video hardware for unity with compiz, choose "classic desktop" session
[14:04] <charlie-tca> That is the no fallback issue
[14:04] <Psi-Jack> Okay, so now, it's at least reported. Now to see if I can solve the problem myself. ;)
[14:07] <charlie-tca> njin, Is that a duplicate of bug 683356 ?
[14:07] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683356 in compiz (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "Unity lost the 2D failback feature (affects: 4) (heat: 20)" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683356
[14:08] <njin> charlie-tca: hello, thanks, but now live session are unusable, i'm looking the other report
[14:12] <Psi-Jack> Heh, sheash..
[14:12] <Psi-Jack> This is scarey.. Almost looks like whomever made the init-functions knows a "reasonable" amount of lsb standards, but completely failed to grasp the status portion completely.
[14:44] <epimeth> Is it possible the package maintainers forgot to add the new linux-headers package to the latest upgrade?
[14:46] <charlie-tca> epimeth, what is the issue?
[14:46] <epimeth> I upgraded last night and when I went to turn on my computer today my wireless card and nvidia driver werent working... apt-get install linux-headers-$(uname -r) fixed the problem...... I figure that should have been part of the upgrade process no?
[14:47] <charlie-tca> I don't know
[14:48] <charlie-tca> I suppose file a bug for it
[14:49] <epimeth> do I do that in launchpad under kubuntu? or ubuntu? is there a specific package I need to enter it under?
[14:51] <charlie-tca> epimeth, using a terminal,    ubuntu-bug linux
[14:54] <epimeth> charlie-tca: kk, cheers
[14:55] <charlie-tca> Thank you
[17:39] <njin> hello to all, bug 683459 I don't know at wich package assign, can you help. Thanks
[17:39] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683459 in ubuntu "hyper and super keys are mapped to the same modifier (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683459
[17:41] <sinurge> njin, no clue :|
[17:44] <njin> sinurge, too advanced for me
[17:45] <sinurge> njin, for me as well guess lets leave it as what is
[19:02] <jcastro> bdmurray: http://status.qa.ubuntu.com/qapkgstatus/unity
[19:02] <jcastro> hey I was wondering, why not graph Fix Released?
[19:06] <bdmurray> jcastro: because it will only ever increase and no work is required of those bugs
[20:57] <njin> bug 683850
[20:57] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683850 in gconf (Ubuntu) "natty 20101201.1 amd 64, loop at login screen (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683850
[20:58] <njin> ouh, already rebuilded
[21:00] <njin> bug 683853
[21:00] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683853 in gnome-panel (Ubuntu) "natty 20101201.1 amd64 classic desktop in live session, missed restart and shutdown (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/683853
[23:11] <Psi-Jack> Okay, so I'd filed a bug using ubuntu-bug -p lsb-base, and it submits it as a bug for lsb, because lsb is the source package for lsb-base, correct?
[23:12] <micahcowan> Sounds right to me.
[23:12] <Psi-Jack> Yeah, Sarge Hallyn completely fubared up my bug report.
[23:12] <micahg> Psi-Jack: -p is deprecated BTW, it's just ubuntu-bug lsb-base
[23:17] <Psi-Jack> Same result, either way, launchpad associates it to lsb.
[23:19] <micahg> Psi-Jack: if you want to drop the bug # here, someone can look into it
[23:20] <Psi-Jack> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lsb/+bug/683640
[23:20] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 683640 in spamassassin (Ubuntu) (and 6 other projects) "status_of_proc is returning incorrect error code (affects: 1) (dups: 1) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Invalid]
[23:22] <micahg> Psi-Jack: right, but if the root cause is determined to be in lsb, the bug should be fixed there
[23:23] <Psi-Jack> Yep. That's what I said. lsb is the actual source package that makes lsb-base.
[23:23] <micahg> Psi-Jack: so how is the bug report messed up?
[23:24] <Psi-Jack> Well, the bug also effects the LSB init of all the other packages I associated with it, and Sarge marked them all invalid.
[23:25] <micahg> Psi-Jack: right, but is there an actual issue to be fixed in those packages?
[23:25] <Psi-Jack> Which also prohibits them from working properly in a CRM situation, like pacemaker.
[23:27] <micahg> Psi-Jack: right, but is there anything to be fixed in those packages?
[23:27] <Psi-Jack> They themselves are broken as a root cause of lsb being broken. So not technicaly, as far as I know, unless changing lsb-base's init-functions causes errors in them.
[23:27] <micahg> Psi-Jack: right, so they're affected, but there's nothing to do, hence invalid
[23:29] <Psi-Jack> I see.. Sorta.. heh
[23:34] <Psi-Jack> Heh. but yeah. Found this one myself because I was trying to put dovecot under pacemaker management control, and when I stopped it, pacemaker started throwing errors because of the return code of dovecot after it was stopped was 4, because the pidfile was deleted as a result of stopping it. Which is correct, except that's expected of stopped services. heh
[23:41] <Psi-Jack> micahg: Now, here's a question.
[23:42] <Psi-Jack> clamav's package's init'd script for clamav-daemon and clamav-freshclam both aren't directly related to lsb because they re-write in the init script status_of_proc, /instead/ of using the init-functions's status_of_proc function proper. Would this be considered related, and needed to be fixed as a result of that?
[23:49] <micahg> Psi-Jack: if it's indeed broke, yes
[23:50] <Psi-Jack> Yeah. clamav-daemon literally has in it's script, status_of_proc() { ... } which is pretty much a clone of /lib/lsb/init-function's almost fully.
[23:51] <Psi-Jack> I'd call that broken as a result of not being LSB compliant, for starters, for re-defining the function.
[23:51] <micahg> ScottK: ^^
[23:52] <ScottK> Psi-Jack: What release are you on?
[23:52] <Psi-Jack> 10.04.1
[23:53] <ScottK> Psi-Jack: Neither Debian nor Ubuntu are LSB compliant themselves.  It's explicitly not a design goal.  It is a goal for LSB compliant packages to work on Debian and Ubuntu.  Your point is orthogonal to this.
[23:54] <ScottK> Psi-Jack: I'm open to patches on clamav to use the lsb functions however.
[23:55] <Psi-Jack> Well, I know ubuntu/canonical is going towards upstart, but for things that /are/ lsb-init oriented, and I'm sure Debian wants to continue to keep in that direction as well, it is important that they /are/ actually lsb-init compliant for CRM control.
[23:56] <Psi-Jack> And upstart... I won't go into how many million bugs on it I need to file. ;)
[23:57] <ScottK> Psi-Jack: For clamav there's no reason not to use the lsb init stuff.
[23:57] <Psi-Jack> Reinventing the wheel whilst stil breaking lsb-init compliancy is a bug.
[23:57] <Psi-Jack> So yeah. :)
[23:57] <ScottK> The clamav package predates the existance of those functions in Ubuntu/Debian.
[23:58] <Psi-Jack> Ahhh. That makes sense. :)
[23:59] <ScottK> So if you can diff me a diff to use the lsb-init functions I think that's a reasonable thing to do and I'll get it pushed into Debian as well.
[23:59] <Psi-Jack> Yep. I can do that. I'd planned on it, too, because I use that in my pacemaker cluster as well.