/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/12/23/#ubuntu-bugs.txt

=== andrew_ is now known as Guest44195
AbhiJithey06:27
AbhiJitwhy i cant mark this bug affect me?06:27
AbhiJithttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/106:27
ubot2Launchpad bug 1 in tilix (and 20 other projects) "Microsoft has a majority market share (affects: 613) (heat: 2975)" [High,New]06:27
AbhiJit:/06:29
micahgAbhiJit: what's the problem?06:29
AbhiJitmicahg, i cant mark it as affect me06:30
micahgAbhiJit: why not06:30
AbhiJitit says time out try again06:30
micahgAbhiJit: you can file a bug against launchpad with the oops code06:30
AbhiJitok06:30
AbhiJitthis error i got = The following errors were encountered:Timeout error, please try again in a few minutes.OK06:31
akshatjAbhiJit, there is an OOPS code below that06:33
AbhiJitakshatj, if you means inside the msg dialog box then its not there06:34
AbhiJitbtw, what is oop code?06:34
AbhiJitakshatj, ?06:38
AbhiJit what is oop code?06:38
akshatjIt appears below the text06:38
AbhiJitok06:38
=== JoeSett is now known as JoeMaverickSett
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
Elbruscan somebody mark bug 692747 as wishlist/triaged, I just added link to upstream bugtracker16:21
ubot2Launchpad bug 692747 in winff (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Device Preset Doesn't Propagate Additional Options section (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/69274716:21
=== akshatj is now known as akshatj|study
Elbrusthanks16:31
Elbrusthat is, thanks mathieu16:31
cyphermoxElbrus, np :)16:39
njinhello, can someone eplain this line ? HW_VAR_MRC: Turn on 1T1R MRC!16:44
hggdhnjin: context, please16:47
njinbug 69367816:48
ubot2Launchpad bug 693678 in ubuntu "when I upgrade kubuntu 10.04 to 10.10,then boot is slow (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/69367816:48
hggdhnjin: I reset the package to linux. Please ask the OP to run 'apport-collect 693678'17:02
njinhggdh: thanks17:03
vishnjin: any reason why you marked Bug #606048 invalid?17:16
ubot2Launchpad bug 606048 in ubuntu (and 1 other project) "All PDF Viewers/Editors aren't in the same category. (affects: 1) (dups: 5) (heat: 49)" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/60604817:16
njinvish: as is triaged in 100 papercut17:26
vishnjin: ?17:26
vishnjin: the concerned package also needs to be identified17:27
vishnjin: the ubuntu package..17:27
njinvish: ubuntu is not a package,17:28
vish;)17:28
vishnjin: you need to identify the relevant ubuntu :)17:28
vishnjin: i.e. need to assign to the right package..17:28
njinvish: for 100 papercut too?17:29
vishnjin: no.. you can leave the 100papercut task alone.. the ubuntu package needs to be assigned17:30
micahgvish: it's actually an issue in multiple packages, the problem has to be defined first before tasks can be added17:31
njinvish: ok I assign to ubuntu and mark as confirmed17:31
vishmicahg: exactly what i think so too..17:31
vishmicahg: but bilal and the OP think otherwise..17:31
micahgvish: also, not all of those are the same, some can edit, some are read only17:32
vishmicahg: yea, i tried to comprehend some of those, but got fed up :(  i probably have to install each and every package and really check what it does..17:33
njinwhat i can do then?17:36
vishnjin: if you can dig into the problem, and figure out where the issue is it would be great :)17:37
micahgvish: I'll comment in the bug17:37
vishnjin:  else just leave the ubuntu task as new , no need to assign..17:37
vishmicahg: cool..17:37
yofelthis is rather complicated anyway, take okulars desktop file for example: "Categories=Qt;KDE;Graphics;Office;Viewer;", so it'll show in both office and graphics, it's not like we can just go and put all pdf apps into one category17:37
yofelif anything put them into 'Viewer' - that doesn't seem to be a category acknowledged by USC though17:37
vishyea..17:39
vishalso, is a pdf viewer right in graphics or in Office.. it purely depends on the usage..17:40
vishpdf editor too..17:40
njinsorry but i cannot understand where is the problem17:42
vishnjin: np.. then you can leave the Ubuntu task as 'new'17:42
micahgnjin: please don't change a bug's status without a comment17:52
njinit can be an idea to improve ubuntu, drag and drop icons between menu ?17:54
micahgnjin: that's a menu editor function17:58
micahgnjin: it's not the same as windows, the menu population is from entries in the .desktop file, not which folder it's in17:58
njinyes, but i still not understanding why we are triaging this as a bug17:58
micahgnjin: the bug is that it might be hard to find what you're looking for17:59
micahgit requires research before it can be closed as invalid as I pointed out17:59
ElPasmoHi people... charlie-tca are you there? I have a doubt about something you told me yesterday...18:15
charlie-tcayes18:16
charlie-tcawhat is it?18:16
ElPasmoYesterday you told me that I should confirm one bug in the same distro (64 bits) that figures in the report (I'd confirmed in a 32 bits machine). The thing is I'm having troubles confirming it and I was wondering how I should proceed. So, my question is: if I can't confirm a bug in the exact distro (64 or 32 bits) but I can confirm it in the other distro... how should I proceed?18:18
ElPasmoYesterday we talked about bug 688857 (only for reference purpose)18:19
ubot2Launchpad bug 688857 in software-center (Ubuntu Maverick) (and 1 other project) "Keyboard Shortcut for searchbar in the Software Center (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/68885718:19
charlie-tcaWhat I said is that the reporter said this is broke in 64 bit. Your comment was18:21
charlie-tcaIn my amd64 machine with Ubuntu 10.04 the shortcut <control>+F works fine. But I confirmed the bug in a 32bits computer with 10.10 so it seems to be a regression.18:21
charlie-tcaYou should confirm this issue with 64bit instead of 32bit in 10.1018:22
charlie-tcasince you did confirm it worked in 64bit using 10.0418:23
charlie-tcaDoes it work or fail in 10.10 64bit?18:23
ElPasmoCan't say :)18:23
ElPasmo:(18:23
ElPasmoToday I'm having problems with 10.10 in my 64 bits so I can't confirm18:24
ElPasmoI don't know if set the status as New18:24
ElPasmoOr adding another distribution for telling that there are reports unconfirmed of this issue both in 32 and 64 bits18:24
charlie-tcaSince you did use 64bit to confirm it in the older release, you should really confirm the issue using the same in 10.10 instead of dropping to 32bit. that was my concern18:24
charlie-tcaIf there are other reports they should be marked duplicates of each other, and this is then comfirmed18:25
ElPasmoBy other report I was meaning my comment...18:25
ElPasmoI found the same issue in a 32 bits machine... but I'm having problems running maverick in my 64 bits machine so I can't confirm in the exact distribution18:26
charlie-tcaConfirmed is valid, since it happens in 32bit. It is just confusing to see it being confirmed working using one arch, and then confirmed not working using the other one18:26
ElPasmoAnd sorry for my english, sometime I'm not able to explain myself clearly :)18:27
charlie-tcaIt is usually better to stay with one or the other is all I was trying to say18:27
charlie-tcaIf we confirm it fails in 10.10 32bit, can we confirm it worked in 10.04 32bit?18:27
ElPasmoIn fact, there is no report on a 10.04 of that issue18:28
ElPasmo:P18:28
charlie-tcabut the reporter did find a failure, which we haven't fully confirmed yet, because sometimes things will work or fail in only 32bit or 64bit18:29
ElPasmoSo it's imperative to confirm it in 64 bits for the bug being set to Triaged18:29
ElPasmoIs there any other step I should do?18:29
charlie-tcaIf we are saying it works in 10.04, yes18:30
ElPasmoOk, I'll try to run maverick in my 64 bits... :)18:30
charlie-tcaor just try to confirm if it worked in lucid 32bit. Either one is okay to make it valid18:31
charlie-tcaDoes that make sense now?18:31
ElPasmoOk, I understand now your point. And what happens if I found an issue in both versions? lucid and maverick?18:32
charlie-tcaIt gets real confusing sometimes18:32
charlie-tcagreat! we can valid the bug and mark it for both18:32
ElPasmoHow I mark it for both?18:32
charlie-tcaadd a tag for lucid and maverick18:32
ElPasmoI see, thanks a lot for your time charlie-tca :)18:33
ElPasmoI'm on it18:33
charlie-tcaYou are welcome18:33
charlie-tcaHang in there. We will get it yet18:33
ElPasmoHi all, I think bug 688857 should be set to Triaged with a Low importance. Can someone do it for me?20:45
ubot2Launchpad bug 688857 in software-center (Ubuntu Maverick) (and 1 other project) "Keyboard Shortcut for searchbar in the Software Center (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/68885720:45
charlie-tcahappily done. Thank you20:48
ElPasmogreat! thanks charlie :)20:48
ElPasmoQuestion: If a bug is present only on Lucid and is corrected on Maverick or Natty. Should the status be changed to Fix released? Is not necessary to fix it also on Lucid since is a LTS?20:52
micahgElPasmo: is it was a confirmed bug in Lucid and fixed in a future release, it should be marked fix released, otherwise, invalid, as for fixing in Lucid, if it qualifies for an SRU, we can get it fixed in Lucid as well20:54
ElPasmoThanks micahg :)20:56
=== elpasmo_ is now known as ElPasmo
ElPasmoHi people, how can I add a bugwatch to an existing bug? I'm trying to add the upstream bug https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=637896 to bug 69263721:34
ubot2Launchpad bug 692637 in eog (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Wrong scaling of svg (affects: 3) (heat: 18)" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/69263721:34
ubot2Gnome bug 637896 in image viewer "Wrong scaling of svg" [Minor,Unconfirmed]21:34
charlie-tcaclick that little triangle to the left of Eye Of Gnome. Then you put the bugzilla url in under Remote Watch - URL21:36
ElPasmooh great charlie-tca, can you set it to Triaged?21:40
charlie-tcasure21:40
ElPasmothanks!21:41
charlie-tcaDone. Thank you21:41
ElPasmoI'm trying the fill bug 428231 with all the information needed but I'm not able to find the bug tracker of the project azureus... I need help :)21:44
ubot2Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/42823121:44
charlie-tcahm, looks to be debian21:49
ElPasmoOk, Ill do in debian. Thanks :)21:51
yofelElPasmo: I guess you should follow http://wiki.vuze.com/w/How_to_report_a_bug21:51
ElPasmocool, thanks yofel21:52
ElPasmoLaunchpad does not recognize the bug tracker at this URL.22:08
ElPasmoThe URL of this bug in the remote bug tracker.22:08
ElPasmoI'm trying to link the upstream bug http://forum.vuze.com/thread.jspa?messageID=234084 to bug 42823122:10
ubot2Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/42823122:10
ElPasmoI've linked into a comment. I think bug 428231 is ready to be set Triaged with a Medium importance. Can anyone do it for me please?22:28
ubot2Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/42823122:28

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!