=== skaet is now known as skaet_afk [00:38] lol @ bug 745350 [00:38] Launchpad bug 745350 in firefox "while working on Firefox/Gmail, my cat sit down on keyboard " [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/745350 [00:38] * RAOF is intrigued. [00:39] he just seems to be reporting a bug to tell me that his cat sat on his keyboard [00:42] That is amusing. [01:05] Hi there, not sure if this is the right place to ask but... I installed gnome-shell from the gnome3 ppa, all went well except themes are broken, can't install gtk3-engines because it depends on libgtk3.0-0 and that breaks everything :) solutions? [01:10] ryanpg, possibly gnome-icon-themes-symbolic [01:12] mimico, I'm not finding that package... googling it now [01:12] *gnome-icon-theme-symbolic [01:13] my bad [01:14] ahh... well both that and gnome-icon-theme are installed [01:15] hmm. [01:15] the issue is that gtk3-engines seems to want libgtk3.0-0 and not libgtk3-0 [01:15] and installing libgtk3.0-0 means dumping 90% of gnome [01:17] someone over in gnome-shell on irc.gnome.org just told me that PPA isn't fully installable atm [01:18] 64bit? [01:18] nope, 32... I guess I'll just purge and do jhbuild [01:18] k [01:18] mimico, but thank you for your help! :) [01:18] :-) === asac_ is now known as asac [02:27] I'm a little new to the whole gnome/gui programming scene... I've always preferred working on kernels and daemons, but the last few days I've been trying to change that. I have ended up fixing a bug in gnome-power-manager that made it stop respecting the gconf settings to lock the screen or not on suspend or hibernate [02:28] and I realized that these settings seem like they belong in the preferences gui rather than requiring the user to go digging around in gconf. Is that correct? Secondly, do you think this new page I added to the gui looks good or should it be done differently? [02:29] psusi: Is there some reason why they're not identically equal to “lock screen on screensaver”? [02:32] * psusi is struggling to figure out photobucket [02:32] Use Do's imageshack upload plugin! [02:32] RAOF, yea... I want my system to lock on hibernate, but not on suspend or general screen saver kicking in [02:33] Why? [02:34] I mean - that seems like a pretty *specific* desire. Is it something that enough people will/should want to do that it is usefully exposed in preferences? [02:36] so you think that most people either want to always lock when the screen saver kicks in, or never? so why bother adding the checkbox to the preferences dialog? [02:37] Which checkbox? [02:37] http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx95/phreak0r/Screenshot-PowerManagementPreferences.png [02:38] that's what I've managed so far [02:38] Ah. [02:40] So, yeah. I don't think having those options exposed makes sense. [02:41] so you think it should just start the screen saver and either universally lock or not based on the screen saver setting, unless someone figures out how to go into gconf and set the more specific settings? [02:41] Yes. [02:41] why? [02:43] Because those preferences are extremely niche. If you want some security (lock my screen) then why is hibernate different from suspend? And you should obviously also lock the keyring in that case, and have the screensaver unlock it. [02:43] I'll admit that lock on screensaver might be sufficiently different to lock on suspend/hibernate, though. [02:44] RAOF, yea, I think plenty of people don't want it to lock every time they don't touch the keyboard for 5 minutes [02:45] I was also thinking of maybe using a drop down list with the options to lock on [suspend, hibernate, neither, both], but it was easiest to add a checkbox tied to the existing bool gconf key [02:46] I'd say there should be at most one checkbox. [02:47] I'd probably side towards locking iff the user needs to enter a password at login. [02:55] if the options are there though, why hide them from the gui? [02:56] It's a tradeoff for users like you who want to do something strange :) [02:56] I was thinking about that the other night... it seems to be part of the gnome philosophy right? if it's kind of esoteric, don't bother exposing it in the gui, make people use gconf? [02:57] seems like what we need is a secret keystroke to enable the gui equivalent of --verbose... something you can hit to say show me all the goodies! ;) [02:57] gnome-plumbing. [02:57] ? [02:57] That's the project you're thinking of :) [03:00] hrm... not finding much on it so far... [03:00] doesn't look like it ever got off the ground ;( [03:03] I think there's at least *some* code, but you're right, it's not exactly taking the world by storm. [03:04] many applications have an "advanced" settings button to put all the esoteric stuff behind [03:04] it seems like gnome doesn't like that idea [03:05] Right. It clutters things up, encourages making options where fixing a problem would be better, and *everyone* hits the advanced settings button at some point. [03:06] how does it clutter things up? it reduces clutter by hiding esoteric options unless you really want them? [03:06] Well, it's an extra tab / button that doesn't have an obvious reason. [03:07] It's a grab-bag of options that would naturally be elsewhere, but aren't because they're not important enough. [03:07] yea, but one button is a very small amount of clutter to continue to allow access to many options hidden behind it [03:08] I agree, rather than gather them all under one place, there should be a way to just make them show up in their natural position [03:08] a sort of global --verbose or I'm an advanced user option that makes them show up all over rather than in a tightly constrained grab bag [03:09] meh, you are talking like a real kernel hacker :} [03:09] not surprising ;) [03:09] I'm still getting used to this whole gui thing ;) [03:10] the magical button that toggles a number of options in the interface sucks - I've seen software that does that, and it's not pretty. [03:10] the underlines on accelerator keys are hidden until you hold down the alt key, maybe something like that could be done for more esoteric options [03:10] ohh? [03:11] why isn't it pretty? and more importantly, how is it worse than forcing people to dig around in gconf? ;) [03:11] same for the --verbose flag - the problem with adding more buttons, checkboxes, tabs, and text entries is that they really clutter interface, and only a small minority of users is going to ever need them [03:11] well that's why they aren't shown normally [03:12] yeah - but they have to be there, they have to be designed, and taken into account. [03:12] yea [03:13] it's one thing if the devs don't feel like taking the time to add an option to the gui preferences screen because it is so esoteric... but if someone wants to take the time, the question is, how to do so that both avoids clutter for most people, but still provides the option for advanced users [03:14] psusi: but advanced users have gconf - there is nothing hard about it.. [03:14] psusi: if something is popular enough there are tools like ubuntu-tweak or gnome-tweak (new tool in gnome3) that can provide ui for that. [03:14] kklimonda, ADVANCED users do, yes... but... well... not quite so advanced users don't ;) [03:14] those struggling in the middle are screwed [03:15] middle class is always getting shorter end of the stick :) [03:15] indeed [03:16] It's simply impossible to create something that fits all needs so we have to compromise. GNOME has always been about creating simple, and usable desktop. [03:16] KDE3 went the other way [03:17] and I still remember applications that had 3 different configuration dialogs :) [03:18] kklimonda: actually, gnome /became/ about that; it wasn't initially [03:19] there should be a way to get the best of both worlds [03:20] that's why I started thinking of a magic key you can smack to verbose++ [03:21] lifeless: right, I've oversimplified - I've meant GNOME 2, which has introduced HIG [03:21] that way it isn't clutter unless someone thinks to themselves, gee, I'm looking for something that seems like it should be here, I wonder if it's just hidden by default? [03:22] psusi: you will love the fact that in GNOME3 you can't even change Gtk+ theme without running gnome-tweak ;) [03:22] I've never even looked at gnome-tweak [03:23] it's a new project, created for GNOME 3 [03:23] ohh, I was thinking ubuntu-tweak [03:23] kklimonda: metacity 4 eva [03:23] it's called gnome-tweak-tool actually [03:25] psusi: you should really talk with mpt, or some other ux folks - they can explain the drawbacks of "advanced" button better. [03:27] kklimonda, I agree that it isn't good to lump all esoteric options under an advanced button... but there should be some way to tell the system that you are looking for more options and don't care if it adds clutter... telling users to use gconf just seems like a cop-out [03:29] the magical "zoom in and enhance", hehe... [03:29] * psusi asks for OPONIES while he's at it [03:30] -ENOPONIES :P [03:30] --use-the-force-luke [03:31] so the whole thing about options is often misrepresented [03:31] the thing is that *if* you can make it better without an option, that is clearly a win: simpler code, less defects, less maintenance [03:31] easier for users to train each other because there is less variation [03:32] in other words, don't make it an option if it is a universally good change [03:32] there is no such thing like an "universally good change" but noone has said that you have to please everyone. [03:33] And also *push back* on options before you've been convinced that it can't be done better. [03:33] right, once you have introduced some new setting, it's pretty much impossible to remove it :) [03:34] jdubs recent series of posts about gnome culture have a pretty good analysis of this meme [03:34] you would have to rename your application, or rewrite a huge chunks of it. [03:34] that seems like an argument for changing/removing a feature rather than converting it to an option [03:34] kklimonda: thats not true at all [03:34] if you remove an option you need to be willing to wear the feedback [03:35] lifeless: feedback, not the outcry for restoring it, and threats of forking your application. [03:35] but if you decide to make it an option, why should it NOT be accessible without going into gconf was more the issue I was contemplating [03:35] kklimonda: depends on the option obviously [03:36] kklimonda: but if you've got *that many objectors* its pretty good data about the importance of supporting their use case. [03:36] lock on screen saver vs suspend vs hibernate is already an option, my question is, why is there no way to configure it in the g-p-m preferences dialog? [03:37] It's a cop-out, basically. [03:37] psusi: I see options that are not available in the gui as situational tweaks. [03:38] psusi: by your definition we should provide gui for g-p-m to switch between suspend on the remaining batter %, or the remaining time [03:38] psusi: and then additional controls to tweak the numbers [03:39] kklimonda: thats not what psusi argued at all though [03:39] lifeless: but you have to put the line somewhere. [03:39] kklimonda: its not about the line [03:39] kklimonda: its about asking how we can improve the syste, [03:40] kklimonda, if it's an option you can set via gconf, yes, why not? [03:40] for instnace, on the time vs % issue, I don't see any use case for a % based limit *unless* time based limits are unreliable. [03:40] And as it turns out, time based limits are terribly unreliable. [03:41] g-p-m, for all its 500MB footprint, is terrible about remaining runtime estimation on my hardware. [03:41] (and btw, 500MB for a battery manager? WTF!) [03:41] 500M of what? [03:41] huh? it's 10mb [03:42] virt, resident is 150MB [03:42] sorry, 200MB [03:42] 2354 robertc 20 0 448m 198m 2680 S 0 2.6 0:55.31 gnome-power-man [03:42] huh [03:42] 1000 850 0.0 0.7 78392 29164 ? Sl Mar29 0:00 gnome-power-manager [03:42] and I blame nvidia for that [03:43] lifeless, rss here is 8.7m [03:43] Mine's 5.5m [03:43] RAOF: want a bug ? :P [03:43] RAOF: I just figured it was terrible [03:44] well, 500M is terrible :) [03:46] yes, yes it is :) [03:46] I'm not sure what to do with such a bug; a pmap might be interesting,though. [03:46] there are lots of settings in gconf that has probably been introduced years before, and now they can't remove them as they are used. [03:47] RAOF: I can ubuntu-bug it up, if you like [03:47] vsz is in general, ridiculously huge, and should be ignored. [03:47] there are keys like /apps/gnome-search-tool/disable_quick_search_second_scan with description "This key determines if the search tool disables the use of the find command after performing a quick search." [03:47] or even /apps/gnome-search-tool/show_additional_options heh [03:48] lifeless: You might as well, attaching pmap -x $(pidof gnome-power-manager); it's certainly a bug! [03:49] my g-p-m has 8792 rss and 176984 vsz... I've long given up on even looking at the vsz of gnome apps [03:51] RAOF: shouldn't that be a apport hook ? [03:52] lifeless: It's not common information to ask for. [03:52] hell, x-chat has a vsz of 426m but only 30.9m rss [03:52] admittedly, its not as bad as chromium [03:53] 740M for one web page [03:53] 3085 robertc 20 0 1642m 739m 3100 S 0 9.6 1:10.51 chromium-browse [03:54] lifeless, yep... similar results here.. hence, ignore vsz, it's meaningless [03:54] psusi: its only meaningless when its shared libraries [03:54] psusi: when its swap, its meaningful [03:54] when it's shared anything [03:54] sure [03:54] It's annoying how difficult it is to distinguish between the two. [03:55] I've got no swap, but thunderbird is showing 858m virt, but only 139 rss and 30.9 shared [03:55] indeed [03:55] 0000000000942000 0 194932 194256 rw--- [ anon ] [03:56] RAOF: ^ [03:56] !!! [03:57] Something is horribly broken. Valgrinding it might reveal leaks, I guess. Does it start out so big, or grow so over time? [03:57] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-power-manager/+bug/745420 [03:57] Launchpad bug 745420 in gnome-power-manager "high res (and virtual) memory sizes" [Undecided,New] [03:57] Please be to not dirtying 200MiB of memory. [03:59] Hm. In other “why are you so big” news… indicator-datetime-service probably shouldn't be using 270MiB RSS. [04:00] RAOF: pmap is there [04:01] RAOF: I'm not sure if it grows or not [04:01] That should be pretty easy to check, though; just restart it? [04:02] RAOF: sure [04:02] but if there is stuff you want from the current process, should get that first [04:03] Not that I can think of; my next step would generally be a valgrind check. [04:06] RAOF: fresh started instance pmap attached to the bug [04:07] Right. So, it's leaking over time. [04:10] RAOF: it seems to stabilise at 500m [04:10] RAOF: so I suspect something like a cache [04:10] RAOF: (500MB virt; 200M rss) [04:11] That could be its time-to-empty/charge history feature happening. [04:11] yeah [04:11] I swap batteries from time to time, and go on off power a lot as I wander around [04:12] I guess you could check natty? I'll see if I can reproduce that by wandering around on/off power. [04:23] RAOF: I should upgrade, just been afraid [04:23] You can be a beta 1 tester :) === skaet_afk is now known as skaet === skaet is now known as skaet_ [06:18] RAOF: Is there a way you can query X as to how much VRAM is available? I'd like to get an exact figure of how much VRAM my Thinkpad's Intel GPU is taking from system RAM. [06:19] More out of curiosity than anything else, the notebook has tons of RAM. [06:21] TheMuso, there is xrestop which shows pixmap memory usage, which isn't total vram but it might give some insights [06:21] TheMuso: I'm not sure that the question actually makes sense any more; I'm not sure that the GPU actually steals memory. [06:22] Rather it'll dynamically acquire and release memory as necessary. [06:22] RAOF: Ah, that makes sense. [06:22] Certainly before GEM/KMS it stole a fixed chunk of memory, but I don't *think* that's the case anymore. [06:23] bryceh: Thanks. [06:24] TheMuso, cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/*vram* shows some vram related data on my radeon. ymmv [06:25] # cat /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/*vram* | tail -n 1 [06:25] total: 131072, used 37553 free 93519 [06:25] Ok thanks. [06:25] * RAOF investigates what's new in intel /sys [06:26] Oh, that's right. /sys/kernel/debug is now restricted. [06:27] /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_gem_objects are what you're after. [06:27] ah ok [06:28] I have ~500MiB worth of objects there, most of which are inactive. [06:30] I like the fact that the amount of RAM used for intel GPUs is now dynamic. [06:30] At least in Linux [06:31] One can only hope Windows does the same... [06:31] I'd presume so; one of the prerequisites for DX 10 hardware/drivers is a sane memory manager. [06:31] Ah ok. [06:32] This is weird, in /sys/kernel/debug/dri I have 0 and 64. [06:32] Yeah. [06:33] I'm not entirely sure what the 64 is to be honest :) [06:34] Well I get the same on my desktop with my radeon card. [06:34] 0 and 64. [06:35] Speaking of Windows, one really nice thing that the Thinkpad power management software does is completely disable/hot unplug the optical drive when not in use for a period of time, to the point where Windows doesn't know its there, but power is still being fed to it. [06:35] So you press the eject button, and windows sees it again and you can use it. [06:35] Really neat. [06:36] That's pretty cool. [06:37] I'm in the market for a new laptop, but no-one seems to make the laptop I want :) [06:38] What do you want? [06:40] Basically: I'd like a 13" macbook with a faster processor, discrete graphics card, and higher resolution screen :) [06:40] Right. [06:41] There are any number of things which satisfy some subset of these critera, but nothing that satisfies all ;) [06:42] * TheMuso nods. [06:42] Nothing in the lenovo range? [06:42] Oh, and a multitouch screen would be nice for actually, you know, *testing* the multitouch stuff Chase wants me to upload :) [06:42] haha [06:43] The x220 is promising, but no discrete chip. The new t420s might be what I'm looking for, although that's a bit bigger at 14" and has an nvidia chip rather than the ati chip I'd prefer. [06:43] Right. [06:43] Nice to know the discrete chip you want is AMD. [06:44] That's not *entirely* because I expect it to work better; it's because it's the chip I'm most likely to be able to get wine working on with free drivers. :) [06:44] lol ok. [06:44] I'd also expect it to work better out of the box, though. [06:45] What are you wanting to use in wine? [06:45] Just have worse proprietary drivers. [06:45] Civ 5, Portal 2, that sort of thing… [06:45] Ok so you want to play games, fair enough. [06:45] Things that are generally rather GPU intensive. [06:45] There 'aint any other windows software I'm pining for! [06:46] Well I didn't know that. :p [06:46] True [06:47] robert_ancell, RAOF, did either of you manage to see Four Corners on Monday night, about the A380 fault from last year? [06:51] Oh, no I didn't. That sounds quite topical! [06:51] It should be on iview, though, so I'll watch it sometime! [06:51] TheMuso, nope [06:51] TheMuso, interesting? [06:54] Yes, they went through and talked about exactly what happened. [06:54] Including a rather elaborate re-enactment. [06:54] Yes, I suggest watching/downloading from iview. [07:03] Good morning [07:17] bryceh: FYI, fglrx is on the DVDs, coordinating with #u-release to accept it [07:18] pitti: huh? [07:18] in ship, no in the live session [07:18] ok [07:19] nvidia too? [07:19] pitti, ah right, forgot [07:20] yes [07:20] I don't think it warrants rebuilding the DVDs, though; it's just in ship, not in the live session or anything [07:20] i. e. if people install it, they should get it from the archive [07:22] bryceh, tjaalton: ok, accepting [07:22] bryceh: I guess this package still has the ABI dep problem on amd64? [07:22] RAOF: btw iirc DX 11 requires a sane memory manager but the requirements were relaxed for DX 10 because nvidia couldn't get going in time for vista [07:22] * pitti -> vaccination, bbl [07:25] Amaranth: nvidia? I thought it was intel (cf: Vista Ready™ lawsuit) [07:26] RAOF: No, intel wanted a way for non-DX10 parts to be vista ready [07:26] Regardless *some* version of DX requires a sane memory manager. Oh, but if it's DX11 then there's no guarantee that intel has one; they have no DX11 parts. [07:26] Amaranth: Ah, of course :/ === skaet_ is now known as skaet_afk [07:27] RAOF: but back when we were having so much trouble with nvidia memory management and compiz I learned they didn't have it fully done on Windows either [07:27] Aaaah. [07:27] Yeah, that's not really something they'd needed to care too much about before. [07:28] RAOF: Remember everyone complaining about nvidia drivers when Vista was released? They were slow, buggy, etc [07:28] Morning all. [07:28] morning Sweetshark [07:28] Goooood morning. [07:47] robert_ancell, hello [07:48] ricotz, hey [07:48] did you had a chance to look at libwnck3, basically it is what you started [07:48] ricotz, I'm fine with the wnck package btw, please upload [07:49] robert_ancell, ok [08:00] robert_ancell, ricotz; either of you guys know about this intense background flickering problem? [08:00] desrt, in? [08:00] shell [08:01] on login or setting the background from the control centre, the background flickers very rapidly between the desired image and complete blackness for a couple of seconds before randomly settling on one or the other (ie: sometimes the background, sometimes blackness) [08:01] desrt, in the GNOME3 PPA? [08:01] yes [08:01] desrt, hmm, no, probably a driver issue? [08:02] it doesn't seem like a driver issue because the problem persists [08:02] desrt, you were able and updated everything? [08:02] ricotz: i'm avoiding upgrades at the moment in order to reduce the number of things i accidentally pull in from your ppa :) [08:03] but i'm up to date as of yesterday [08:03] (it was happening before then for a day or two) === warp11 is now known as warp10 [08:03] it almost looks like two things are fighting with each other to have the background be black or not [08:06] desrt, is this on nvidia blob? [08:06] ironlake [08:07] +1 for awesome use of the word 'blob', though :) [08:08] good morning [08:08] didrocks: sup? [08:09] hey desrt, do you enjoy your trip? :) [08:09] ya. it's going pretty nicely so far. [08:09] having fun with some of the PPAs at the moment [08:09] desrt, yeah, best way to name it ;) -- cant find any bug reports for intel, but nvidia had a similar problem [08:10] ricotz: if we've seen the problem on nvidia and intel as well then maybe it's not a driver problem [08:10] desrt, i am on 270.30 without problems though [08:10] hm. interesting. [08:10] do you still experience the problem with slowness when notification icons are present? [08:10] desrt: excellent. That's everytime the same kind of "fun" with drivers and such :) [08:11] desrt, yes [08:11] so the weird thing is that i never had it before and then after upgrading maybe 4 days ago i had the problem, and have it 100% of the time [08:11] i should check my apt log... [08:12] desrt, maybe a clutter bug then [08:14] it could have been really a lot of things [08:14] there was a massive number of upgrades [08:14] maybe it was libpcre [08:15] would be nice if we had apt-bisect :) [08:16] had an X server upgrade here too [08:16] desrt, there seems to be workaround for the nvidia issue, perhaps it solves intel too http://bugzilla-attachments.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=157326 [08:17] desrt, you are running the x-stack from natty repo? [08:17] yes [08:17] nothing fancy there [08:17] ricotz: i'll try this patch. give me a moment. [08:18] just apply it and restart gnome-shell should be enough [08:18] ya. that's what i'm doing [08:18] ;) [08:18] not fixed [08:18] it was just changing the priority to 500, right? [08:19] ya... [08:19] looks so, yes [08:19] it's an a substantially different offset in my version of the file [08:19] does the flickering effect the whole screen or only a part of it? [08:19] just the background [08:20] and only when trying to set the background [08:20] have you turned on the nautilus-desktop? [08:20] no. [08:21] maybe i should try that, though :) [08:21] is that a dconf key or something these days? [08:21] i was thinking if you are using it, it might be the cause [08:21] use can the gnome-tweak-tools [08:22] http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-tweak-tool [08:22] ah. i've heard rumours about this mythical tool [08:22] you can start it right out of the source folder [08:22] * desrt hopes it is small [08:23] having nautilus draw the desktop fixes it [08:24] i love tweak tool! [08:24] hmm, so i might need to turn it off then to see the problem :P [08:26] nope, works fine [08:28] i'm tempted to leave nautilus rendering the desktop so i don't see the problem anymore :p [08:29] hey seb128 [08:30] hellio pitti [08:30] how are you? [08:31] seb128: pretty good, thanks! [08:31] how about yourself? [08:31] * pitti prepares for a mixed release / patch pilot day [08:36] pitti, I'm fine thanks, ready for a mixed iso testing, bug triaging day [08:51] ok, pitti just beat me to the g-c-c button id thing while I was reviewing the commits [08:51] pitti, will you commit to the packaging vcs as well? [08:51] oh, sorry for overlapping then [08:51] seb128: already at it [08:51] ok [08:52] you are too fast! [08:52] pitti, btw the gtk bug just assigned to our team is an indicator issue and fixed in natty [08:52] oh, awesome, I didn't get to that one yet [08:52] pitti, btw do you watch all desktop bugs? [08:53] seb128: I don't, but I'm subscribed to oem-priority bugs [08:53] just wondering how you noticed the gcc one since it was not assigned to the team or anything [08:53] oh ok [08:53] it makes sense ;-) [08:53] I can't keep up with them all, I'm afraid -- I don't have seb128 powers [08:54] pitti: (it's blackmagic) :) hey pitti! [08:54] * pitti hugs didrocks [08:54] * didrocks hugs pitti [08:54] * pitti hugs seb128 as well [08:56] seb128: and I need 4 more bug fixes to catch up with mvo :) [08:57] * pitti pats https://bugs.launchpad.net/~pitti/+assignedbugs?field.status=Fix+Committed -- take that, mvo! [08:57] * pitti hugs mvo [08:57] * seb128 hugs pitti [08:58] * pitti gets into the plane seat [08:59] pitti, hum [08:59] pitti, happy piloting! ;) [08:59] thanks :) [09:00] seb128: what's the "hum"? [09:01] pitti, nothing, I was about to make a comment about bug fixed and didrocks but decided to not ;) [09:01] I've given up trying to chase him :) [09:02] \o/ [09:03] morning [09:03] hey rodrigo_ [09:04] hey rodrigo_ [09:04] we get quite some pygtk UnicodeDecodeError crashes nowadays [09:04] didrocks: looking forward to another 43 from https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bugs?field.status=Fix+Committed :) [09:04] it's weird [09:04] did something change in regard of encoding, utf handling? [09:04] seb128: yeah, I fixed another bunch of them yesterday [09:04] 2.7 changed the unicode handling a bit to be a bit closer to 3.0 [09:05] but some things actually work better now [09:05] pitti: oh? time to get into gears it seems ,) [09:05] pitti: we decided to not stop at 42, still 2 days to go! :-) [09:05] (for me) [09:06] mvo: well, you are already -- you are first on the list (not counting ueber-didrocks) [09:06] mvo, hey, wie gehts? [09:06] pitti, bah, bug #745022, seems the bug pattern is not working? [09:06] Launchpad bug 745022 in apport "apport-gtk assert failure: python: ../../src/xcb_io.c:462: _XAllocID: Assertion `ret != inval_id' failed." [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/745022 [09:06] seb128: danke, gut! [09:07] didrocks: bug 737467 perhaps? :-) [09:07] Launchpad bug 737467 in compiz "compiz crashed with SIGSEGV in g_closure_invoke()" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/737467 [09:07] pitti, bug #738939 is weird but seems to affect some users [09:07] Launchpad bug 738939 in apport "apport-gtk crashed with TypeError in __init__(): must be a subtype of GObject" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/738939 [09:07] seb128: looking [09:07] seb128: (the bug pattern one first) [09:08] seb128, hi, are icon theme updates still possible? [09:08] pitti: should be fixed with the bunch of signal and handler disconnection that are already landed or about to lan :) [09:08] land* [09:08] seb128: ah [09:08] the second one is not specific to apport, jockey has similar ones [09:08]