[06:11] so it appears the nvidia kernel module no longer works (fully updated alpha 2) [08:24] ping brendand [08:30] pong evfool [08:32] about bug 329441 ... I just have found that there is a context menu with check/uncheck all in update-manager, maybe the bug should be updated to be about the discoverability of these? [08:32] Launchpad bug 329441 in update-manager (Ubuntu) "Need to have select all and unselect all option when asking for installing updates (heat: 4)" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/329441 [08:32] brendand^ [08:37] evfool: yeah, that makes sense [08:41] mvo: also, the Check all/Uncheck all maybe should be updated to select/unselect all, as there is a Check button [08:41] mvo: and Check all and Check are not related at all... one checks for updates, the other selects all [08:42] although it's hard to find a place to expose select/unselect all without cluttering the UI [08:50] evfool: hm, interessting point. I guess select make indeed more sense than check [08:51] mvo: anyway I guess it should be updated before translations freeze, even if the discoverability is not changed at all [08:51] agreed [08:51] mvo: I'll do it this week, along with some other string changes and bugfixes [08:53] great, thanks. I will merge it right away [08:59] evfool - on my system it says 'Tick All' and 'Untick All'. Are you guys translating from German? [09:00] or maybe using US English? [09:00] brendand: US English [09:00] huh, interesting [09:01] select is probably more widely translatable === zyga-afk is now known as zyga [10:44] jibel - i need your help with a lightdm bug [10:44] jibel - there are so many reports it's getting lost amongst them all [10:45] brendand, how can I help ? [10:45] you need to assign the bug to a team [10:45] (i'm not sure can i do that) [10:46] it's a tiny bit ridiculous that the only confirmed, non-dupe of this bug is Importance - Medium and not assigned [10:47] i had set it to critical but somehow that one got marked as a duplicate and the 'master' bug is not even confirmed [10:47] no idea how that happened [10:47] i think maybe the retracer did it [10:48] this is the master bug at the moment: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lightdm/+bug/811222 [10:48] brendand: Error: Bug #811222 is private. [10:48] oh, it needs to be unprivated [10:49] let me check the Core Dump [10:49] it already known and the master is critical IIRC [10:49] it/it is [10:50] where is it? [10:51] there was this one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lightdm/+bug/809890 [10:51] Launchpad bug 809890 in lightdm (Ubuntu) "lightdm-example-gtk-greeter crashed with SIGSEGV in __strcmp_ssse3() (dup-of: 811222)" [Critical,Confirmed] [10:51] Launchpad bug 811222 in lightdm (Ubuntu) "lightdm-example-gtk-greeter crashed with SIGSEGV in _start() (affects: 14) (dups: 8) (heat: 168)" [Medium,New] [10:54] jibel - if there is a proper bug for this issue can you let me know which one it is? [10:55] urgh, the apport-duplicate finder hit again. Let me fix this [10:55] the original issue was 809890 [10:59] brendand, I changed the order. Master is now 809890, there is a proposition of patch in it [10:59] and targeted to oneiric so it won't fall off radar [11:00] jibel - cool. hopefully one of the lightdm maintainers will look at it soon [11:01] jibel - not too sure the patch is correct, might fix the immediate problem but sounds like it could break other stuff. [11:02] now, i have a couple of pretty serious bugs i need to file myself... [11:02] thanks jibel [12:44] anyone else having problems with suspend all of a sudden in Oneiric? [12:44] i would have assumed hardware specific kernel regression but using 3.0.4 for example doesn't help [12:44] basically my system just won't suspend [12:44] I do, as in bug 809729 [12:44] Launchpad bug 809729 in linux (Ubuntu) "[oneiric] kernel 3.0.0-4 fails to suspend on a eeePC 1000H (affects: 1) (heat: 655)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/809729 [12:45] yofel - strange, i only got it yesterday and i'm sure i was on 3.0.4 for a while (3.0.5 even) [12:45] maybe i didn't suspend my system after updating to 3.0.4??? [12:46] i guess only i can answer that, but it seems unlikely [12:46] haven't tried -5 yet actually, I'll do that later [12:46] anything in dmesg? [12:46] i can't switch vt's either [12:56] yofel - i also lose my network after suspending :( ... [12:57] that I can't confirm, in my case the system simply stuck for ~20s and came up again since it couldn't suspend [12:57] the kernel or syslog should have some information about the network [13:09] yofel - are you able to shutdown cleanly after failure to suspend? [13:09] yes [13:10] sounds a bit different from what i have [13:10] i'm running 3.0.3 now, going to try it and see what happens [13:20] pedro_ - any bug day this week? [13:22] brendand, yes, just created the page, banshee is the target [13:22] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20110721 [13:23] kamusin is going to send the announcement shortly [13:39] announcement sent pedro_ [13:40] kamusin, awesome, thanks! [16:03] micahg: my math was bad its about 5% of bugs [16:08] bdmurray: ok, BTW, we're down to ~92k from ~97k, so you're doing some good work, but as was discussed on -devel the other night, open bugs aren't the issue as much as weeding out non-bugs [16:10] micahg: right I'm cleaning up lots of apport-package duplicates / invalid bugs and stopping them from coming in [16:10] * micahg hugs bdmurray [16:12] * bdmurray presents http://status.qa.ubuntu.com/qapkgstatus/dpkg as an example [16:45] something is happening with lightdm in the latest Oneiric daily image right? it doesn't ask for the password [16:46] kamusin, you mean you have only the background when you select a user ? [16:47] I was able to select my username and after click on it seems like he wants to start the session immediately without ask for the password [16:48] It starts your session? [16:48] kamusin, but does the session start or nothing happens ? [16:48] mine give a blank wallpaper [16:48] nope, nothing happens [16:48] kamusin, bug 809890 [16:48] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/811909 [16:48] Launchpad bug 809890 in lightdm (Ubuntu Oneiric) (and 1 other project) "lightdm-example-gtk-greeter crashed with SIGSEGV in __strcmp_ssse3() (affects: 15) (dups: 9) (heat: 198)" [Critical,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/809890 [16:48] Launchpad bug 811909 in lightdm (Ubuntu) "lightdm-example-gtk-greeter crashed with SIGSEGV in _start() (affects: 9) (dups: 5) (heat: 72)" [Medium,Confirmed] [16:49] hm, maybe mine should be critical too? [16:49] excelent, thank you guys [16:54] I wish they could fix this issue soon and even better before the bugday begins heh [16:58] QA Meeting at #ubuntu-meeting in ~2 mins! [18:27] bug reports against PPAs are not accepted as a rule, right? I don't see a standard response for that. [18:29] I believe it stems from the fact that bug reports are only accepted against current packages in repositories, and if the package is in a PPA, it is not currently in the repository [18:29] hrm... might need to add a standard response for this... [18:30] We don't accept them against source forge or any other thing outside the repositories, either [18:31] We already have a standard response - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Responses#Packages_not_provided_by_Ubuntu [18:31] ahh, I was searching for PPA and coming up empty handed [19:57] RedSingularity, about bug 797673, you were right with libdrm-nouveau. There is a dependency tree that makes the upgrader remove upstart, which hopefully it refuses. [19:57] My opinion is to move it to answers.lp.net [19:57] Launchpad bug 797673 in update-manager (Ubuntu) "upgrade from Ubuntu 10.10 to 11.0.4 64bit is halted (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/797673 [20:37] nagging question - is it the duty or the right of bug-control to assign bugs to teams? [20:38] brendand: that depends on the team and their policies [20:39] in general, it isn't a good idea to assign people work without asking [20:40] well, of course not to individuals ;) [20:42] well, usually you assign bugs to the person that's working on it (which is usually done by him/herself) [20:42] brendand: as a general ru8le, bug-control does not assign bugs to teams or people [20:42] if a team has a policy that bugs should get assigned to them then you do so [20:42] but I don't know of one currently now that the desktop team doesn't do that anymore [20:43] brendand: is there a specific bug you are concerned about? [20:43] bdmurray - no, it's a general question. [20:43] then no ;-) [20:43] why would you want to assign it to a team? [20:44] correction: bugs are only assigned to people that are working on _fixing_ them, not working on them in general [20:47] it's a very usual part of the bug management process to assign bugs to either a team or a individual within the team whose job it is to manage them on behalf of the team [20:51] i'm only asking if this is a role of ubuntu-bug-control [20:53] we currently don't do that so: No. But if you wanted to do that you would need bug control permissions. [20:57] so we *can* but shouldn't === yofel_ is now known as yofel === kentb is now known as kentb-out === rsalveti` is now known as rsalveti