[00:18] hggdh: now I am, what's up? [00:19] micahg: remember the user we created to interface with the wiki changes for bugsquad? [00:19] hggdh: umm..., I can probably find it [00:20] heh [00:20] I just wanted to know if it is still defined on your domain -- we stopped receiving moderation requests for it, and I am just checking [00:21] hggdh: yep, still fwds to ubuntu-bugsquad@l.u.c [00:21] micahg: all we needed, thanks, we will keep on with IS [02:05] Could someone familiar take a look at bug 784342 for me? [02:05] Launchpad bug 784342 in notecase (Ubuntu) "Request notecase be removed from Repository (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/784342 [02:06] Do I need anything else for that to be removed? [02:07] charlie-tca: looking [02:11] charlie-tca: is it broke? [02:11] yup [02:12] charlie-tca: please note that in the bug and I'll ACK the removal [02:12] uses most of the cpu, to the point nothing else can be run until it is killed [02:12] Thanks [02:12] charlie-tca: BTW, normally, you'd subscribe ubuntu-sponsors to the bug when filing a request like this [02:13] the sponsor will check for rdepends and ACK or NACK the request [02:14] That's what I didn't know [02:14] charlie-tca: sounds like another use case for the packaging guide :) [02:14] heh, never tried this before. [02:15] updated the bug with the issue and bug number for reference [02:15] charlie-tca: thanks [02:15] Thank you [02:16] charlie-tca: you're welcome [02:17] * micahg thinks with a little work we can rope charlie-tca into a contributing developer :) [02:20] * charlie-tca thinks with a lot of work, he could learn something [02:21] charlie-tca: you just did learn something w/out a lot of work :) [02:21] oops [02:24] * bcurtiswx wishes he could learn as fast as some people around here ;) === luciano_ is now known as virusuy === yofel_ is now known as yofel === smuxi-user-jtayl is now known as jtaylor [12:29] bug 784073 [12:29] doesn't unitys search box support hidden menu items? [12:29] Launchpad bug 784073 in apport (Ubuntu) "Apport does not open whatsoever (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/784073 [15:43] Hi! could someone help me with bug 724540? I think it should be Importance: Low and Status: Fix Released as it's fixed in Natty [15:43] Launchpad bug 724540 in checkbox (Ubuntu) "System testing only worked once (affects: 1) (heat: 10)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/724540 [15:45] roadmr: you can mark a bug fix released [15:45] micahg: you're right, thanks! I'll do that - how about importance? [15:46] roadmr: set [15:46] micahg: thanks so much ! [15:46] roadmr, done [15:47] roadmr: thank you for your work :) [15:48] roadmr, also it's a good practice to paste the part of the changelog mentioning when and in which version or commit it was fixed. [15:50] RedSingularity, about bug 780474, the log files attached are from an upgrade to maverick (the logs are from 2010-10-10) [15:50] Launchpad bug 780474 in update-manager (Ubuntu) "Upgrade to Natty Nawhal failed because package 'ubuntu-minimal' wasn't found (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/780474 [15:50] RedSingularity, You must be careful about the actual content of the logs. [15:51] RedSingularity, update-manager moves the previous upgrade log files to a directory named with the date of the day, that confuses users sometimes. [15:51] RedSingularity, also do not ask to run potentially dangerous commands like 'sudo rm -r' unless it is really really needed to workaround a very specific issue and there is no standard command to fix it. [15:52] jibel: that makes sense, I'll update the bug with the changelog snippet [15:53] jibel: about bug 772820, the user replied with output from apt-cache policy debconf and he appears to have official ubuntu versions :-/ (you suspected he had a debian version). Maybe he did a fresh install and didn't tell us? [15:53] Launchpad bug 772820 in checkbox (Ubuntu) "package checkbox 0.11.3 failed to install/upgrade: ErrorMessage: subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 (affects: 2) (dups: 1) (heat: 16)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/772820 [15:55] roadmr, it is not the original reporter who replied :-) Both Jason but not the same name nor lpid [15:56] jibel: ah! yes, somehow two jasons reported very similar bugs.. never mind then, I'll deal with them until we get the info we need [15:57] roadmr, and btw the second Jason already upgraded to Oneiric, that's likely a different problem [16:44] jibel: hey. I thought the most recent log files will be located at the root of the dist-upgrade directory? You think the user uploaded logs from a folder higher in the tree? [16:46] jibel: for example: /var/log/dist-upgrade/date-of-upgrade/files ? === deryck is now known as deryck[lunch] [17:56] RedSingularity, yes, I think he did and the date in main.log is 2010-10-10 [18:03] jibel: my mistake then. I always assume they upload the files from the root dir. Will take note of that in the future. While I have you here, take a look at bug 783549 I have never seen that type of log before. Whats it about? [18:03] Launchpad bug 783549 in update-manager (Ubuntu) "dist-upgrade ubuntu-minimal not found (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/783549 [18:04] RedSingularity, expect the unexpected. [18:04] jibel: indeed :) [18:04] * jibel looking [18:05] RedSingularity, Looks like the output has been redirected to screen rather than the logs. [18:06] interesting, I've never seen that before. [18:06] jibel: me neither :/ [18:08] RedSingularity, that makes 2 bugs. the ubuntu-minimal thing which can be any network or source related issue and the output being redirected to screen and not captured in the logs [18:09] RedSingularity, you can try to reproduce the 2nd one with a do-release-upgrade ran from screen. I'm curious if it can be reproduced this way. [18:09] jibel: ran from a terminal? [18:11] RedSingularity, ssh to a headless box, run screen then do-release-upgrade, or before trying to reproduce ask for the setup of this user and how he did proceed. That will shorten the guess game. [18:13] jibel: ok will do. === deryck[lunch] is now known as deryck [18:36] Im not sure, someone marked bug 722024 as incomplete, however I think its invalid, what is your guys opinion? [18:36] Launchpad bug 722024 in file-roller (Ubuntu) "Handle .rar files (affects: 1) (heat: 45)" [Wishlist,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/722024 [18:40] JoshuaL: convert to support request if it already works and the user needs help implementing [18:41] micahg, thanks === JoshuaL_ is now known as JoshuaL [18:50] qa meeting in 10mn on #ubuntu-quality [18:50] qa? [18:59] quality assurance [18:59] hackers [18:59] is the meeting open for everyone? [19:00] yes it is [19:01] ok thanks :) [19:07] pretty much everything is open, doesn't mean there will be an opportunity for random people to offer useful input though :] [19:27] jibel: the original jason posted back on bug 772820 and it looks like he has a non-ubuntu debconf installed. [19:27] Launchpad bug 772820 in checkbox (Ubuntu) "package checkbox 0.11.3 failed to install/upgrade: ErrorMessage: subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 (affects: 2) (dups: 1) (heat: 16)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/772820 [19:27] jibel: should this bug then be invalid, and the duplicate delinked? (as in that one, it does have the ubuntu packages - it's the *other* jason) === seb128_ is now known as seb128 [20:23] hello fellows, can someone look at bug 784705 ,thanks [20:23] Launchpad bug 784705 in ubuntu "i386 version of gcc-4.5 fails to compile C or Fortran files on CIFS mounts (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/784705 [20:26] njin: I'd suggest moving it to gcc-4.5 and letting the toolchain maintainers take a look [20:27] ok thanks micahg [20:37] Can someone take a look at the bug i report and confirm it when possible (importance low) bug 771983 [20:37] Launchpad bug 771983 in indicator-me (Ubuntu) "Sometimes I am unable to type in the "Post to.." input field. (affects: 1) (heat: 244)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/771983 [21:13] what to do when a bug is solved by a workaround (for example removing package X and reinstall the package where the bug occurred)? [21:24] And can someone check bug 784738, I believe it has all the info required. [21:24] Launchpad bug 784738 in linux (Ubuntu) "internal loudspeakers not switched off when pluging in headphones (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/784738 [21:48] JoshuaL: set it to invalid, also see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Responses/#Bugs%20resolved%20after%20update%20or%20config%20change [22:03] does smspillaz have a work log or something public to see what he's working on; there's some fairly substantial bugs (2) with compiz that i'd like to see if anyone has even looked at [22:05] specificly bug 774651 and bug 697358 [22:05] Launchpad bug 774651 in compiz (Ubuntu) "windows initially mapped with the fullscreen property are never "seen" by compiz (affects: 1) (heat: 244)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/774651 [22:05] Launchpad bug 697358 in gnome-panel (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "Regression in window list applet (wnck-applet) behavior (affects: 78) (dups: 6) (heat: 440)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/697358 [22:06] theres basically some weird window lifetime stuff going on with some of the properties and compiz doesn't handle them properly anymore [22:12] Can bug 784416 be set to triaged? there's output from ubiquity --debug and I can't make much sense of it but someone from ubiquity might. I'm not sure about importance though - looks pretty critical to this guy who can't use his computer :) [22:12] Launchpad bug 784416 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu 11.04 installer crash (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/784416 [22:33] evening