[06:27] <AbhiJit> hey
[06:27] <AbhiJit> why i cant mark this bug affect me?
[06:27] <AbhiJit> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1
[06:27] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1 in tilix (and 20 other projects) "Microsoft has a majority market share (affects: 613) (heat: 2975)" [High,New]
[06:29] <AbhiJit> :/
[06:29] <micahg> AbhiJit: what's the problem?
[06:30] <AbhiJit> micahg, i cant mark it as affect me
[06:30] <micahg> AbhiJit: why not
[06:30] <AbhiJit> it says time out try again
[06:30] <micahg> AbhiJit: you can file a bug against launchpad with the oops code
[06:30] <AbhiJit> ok
[06:31] <AbhiJit> this error i got = The following errors were encountered:Timeout error, please try again in a few minutes.OK
[06:33] <akshatj> AbhiJit, there is an OOPS code below that
[06:34] <AbhiJit> akshatj, if you means inside the msg dialog box then its not there
[06:34] <AbhiJit> btw, what is oop code?
[06:38] <AbhiJit> akshatj, ?
[06:38] <AbhiJit>  what is oop code?
[06:38] <akshatj> It appears below the text
[06:38] <AbhiJit> ok
[16:21] <Elbrus> can somebody mark bug 692747 as wishlist/triaged, I just added link to upstream bugtracker
[16:21] <ubot2> Launchpad 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/692747
[16:31] <Elbrus> thanks
[16:31] <Elbrus> that is, thanks mathieu
[16:39] <cyphermox> Elbrus, np :)
[16:44] <njin> hello, can someone eplain this line ? HW_VAR_MRC: Turn on 1T1R MRC!
[16:47] <hggdh> njin: context, please
[16:48] <njin> bug 693678
[16:48] <ubot2> Launchpad 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/693678
[17:02] <hggdh> njin: I reset the package to linux. Please ask the OP to run 'apport-collect 693678'
[17:03] <njin> hggdh: thanks
[17:16] <vish> njin: any reason why you marked Bug #606048 invalid?
[17:16] <ubot2> Launchpad 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/606048
[17:26] <njin> vish: as is triaged in 100 papercut
[17:26] <vish> njin: ?
[17:27] <vish> njin: the concerned package also needs to be identified
[17:27] <vish> njin: the ubuntu package..
[17:28] <njin> vish: ubuntu is not a package,
[17:28] <vish> ;)
[17:28] <vish> njin: you need to identify the relevant ubuntu :)
[17:28] <vish> njin: i.e. need to assign to the right package..
[17:29] <njin> vish: for 100 papercut too?
[17:30] <vish> njin: no.. you can leave the 100papercut task alone.. the ubuntu package needs to be assigned
[17:31] <micahg> vish: it's actually an issue in multiple packages, the problem has to be defined first before tasks can be added
[17:31] <njin> vish: ok I assign to ubuntu and mark as confirmed
[17:31] <vish> micahg: exactly what i think so too..
[17:31] <vish> micahg: but bilal and the OP think otherwise..
[17:32] <micahg> vish: also, not all of those are the same, some can edit, some are read only
[17:33] <vish> micahg: 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..
[17:36] <njin> what i can do then?
[17:37] <vish> njin: if you can dig into the problem, and figure out where the issue is it would be great :)
[17:37] <micahg> vish: I'll comment in the bug
[17:37] <vish> njin:  else just leave the ubuntu task as new , no need to assign..
[17:37] <vish> micahg: cool..
[17:37] <yofel> this 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 category
[17:37] <yofel> if anything put them into 'Viewer' - that doesn't seem to be a category acknowledged by USC though
[17:39] <vish> yea..
[17:40] <vish> also, is a pdf viewer right in graphics or in Office.. it purely depends on the usage..
[17:40] <vish> pdf editor too..
[17:42] <njin> sorry but i cannot understand where is the problem
[17:42] <vish> njin: np.. then you can leave the Ubuntu task as 'new'
[17:52] <micahg> njin: please don't change a bug's status without a comment
[17:54] <njin> it can be an idea to improve ubuntu, drag and drop icons between menu ?
[17:58] <micahg> njin: that's a menu editor function
[17:58] <micahg> njin: it's not the same as windows, the menu population is from entries in the .desktop file, not which folder it's in
[17:58] <njin> yes, but i still not understanding why we are triaging this as a bug
[17:59] <micahg> njin: the bug is that it might be hard to find what you're looking for
[17:59] <micahg> it requires research before it can be closed as invalid as I pointed out
[18:15] <ElPasmo> Hi people... charlie-tca are you there? I have a doubt about something you told me yesterday...
[18:16] <charlie-tca> yes
[18:16] <charlie-tca> what is it?
[18:18] <ElPasmo> Yesterday 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?
[18:19] <ElPasmo> Yesterday we talked about bug 688857 (only for reference purpose)
[18:19] <ubot2> Launchpad 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/688857
[18:21] <charlie-tca> What I said is that the reporter said this is broke in 64 bit. Your comment was
[18:21] <charlie-tca> In 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.
[18:22] <charlie-tca> You should confirm this issue with 64bit instead of 32bit in 10.10
[18:23] <charlie-tca> since you did confirm it worked in 64bit using 10.04
[18:23] <charlie-tca> Does it work or fail in 10.10 64bit?
[18:23] <ElPasmo> Can't say :)
[18:23] <ElPasmo> :(
[18:24] <ElPasmo> Today I'm having problems with 10.10 in my 64 bits so I can't confirm
[18:24] <ElPasmo> I don't know if set the status as New
[18:24] <ElPasmo> Or adding another distribution for telling that there are reports unconfirmed of this issue both in 32 and 64 bits
[18:24] <charlie-tca> Since 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 concern
[18:25] <charlie-tca> If there are other reports they should be marked duplicates of each other, and this is then comfirmed
[18:25] <ElPasmo> By other report I was meaning my comment...
[18:26] <ElPasmo> I 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 distribution
[18:26] <charlie-tca> Confirmed 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 one
[18:27] <ElPasmo> And sorry for my english, sometime I'm not able to explain myself clearly :)
[18:27] <charlie-tca> It is usually better to stay with one or the other is all I was trying to say
[18:27] <charlie-tca> If we confirm it fails in 10.10 32bit, can we confirm it worked in 10.04 32bit?
[18:28] <ElPasmo> In fact, there is no report on a 10.04 of that issue
[18:28] <ElPasmo> :P
[18:29] <charlie-tca> but the reporter did find a failure, which we haven't fully confirmed yet, because sometimes things will work or fail in only 32bit or 64bit
[18:29] <ElPasmo> So it's imperative to confirm it in 64 bits for the bug being set to Triaged
[18:29] <ElPasmo> Is there any other step I should do?
[18:30] <charlie-tca> If we are saying it works in 10.04, yes
[18:30] <ElPasmo> Ok, I'll try to run maverick in my 64 bits... :)
[18:31] <charlie-tca> or just try to confirm if it worked in lucid 32bit. Either one is okay to make it valid
[18:31] <charlie-tca> Does that make sense now?
[18:32] <ElPasmo> Ok, I understand now your point. And what happens if I found an issue in both versions? lucid and maverick?
[18:32] <charlie-tca> It gets real confusing sometimes
[18:32] <charlie-tca> great! we can valid the bug and mark it for both
[18:32] <ElPasmo> How I mark it for both?
[18:32] <charlie-tca> add a tag for lucid and maverick
[18:33] <ElPasmo> I see, thanks a lot for your time charlie-tca :)
[18:33] <ElPasmo> I'm on it
[18:33] <charlie-tca> You are welcome
[18:33] <charlie-tca> Hang in there. We will get it yet
[20:45] <ElPasmo> Hi all, I think bug 688857 should be set to Triaged with a Low importance. Can someone do it for me?
[20:45] <ubot2> Launchpad 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/688857
[20:48] <charlie-tca> happily done. Thank you
[20:48] <ElPasmo> great! thanks charlie :)
[20:52] <ElPasmo> Question: 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?
[20:54] <micahg> ElPasmo: 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 well
[20:56] <ElPasmo> Thanks micahg :)
[21:34] <ElPasmo> Hi 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 692637
[21:34] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 692637 in eog (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Wrong scaling of svg (affects: 3) (heat: 18)" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/692637
[21:34] <ubot2> Gnome bug 637896 in image viewer "Wrong scaling of svg" [Minor,Unconfirmed]
[21:36] <charlie-tca> click that little triangle to the left of Eye Of Gnome. Then you put the bugzilla url in under Remote Watch - URL
[21:40] <ElPasmo> oh great charlie-tca, can you set it to Triaged?
[21:40] <charlie-tca> sure
[21:41] <ElPasmo> thanks!
[21:41] <charlie-tca> Done. Thank you
[21:44] <ElPasmo> I'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] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/428231
[21:49] <charlie-tca> hm, looks to be debian
[21:51] <ElPasmo> Ok, Ill do in debian. Thanks :)
[21:51] <yofel> ElPasmo: I guess you should follow http://wiki.vuze.com/w/How_to_report_a_bug
[21:52] <ElPasmo> cool, thanks yofel
[22:08] <ElPasmo> Launchpad does not recognize the bug tracker at this URL.
[22:08] <ElPasmo> The URL of this bug in the remote bug tracker.
[22:10] <ElPasmo> I'm trying to link the upstream bug http://forum.vuze.com/thread.jspa?messageID=234084 to bug 428231
[22:10] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/428231
[22:28] <ElPasmo> I'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] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 428231 in azureus (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Badly under-reports bandwidth usage. (affects: 2) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/428231