[02:45] <Chat8379> s
[02:46] <Chat8379> hi
[04:55] <RedSingularity> Ok good.  Yes, the user has the xswat ppa installed so I am not surprised.  Could you give me the dependency tree if possible?  Here is the bug link again.  bug 797673
[04:55] <ubot4> 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
[04:55] <RedSingularity> jibel_: ^
=== jibel__ is now known as jibel
=== chalcedny is now known as chalcedony
[11:04] <evfool> ping mvo
[11:30] <mvo> hey evfool
[11:31] <evfool> mvo: could you please check bug 410310's last comment, Manfred Hampl does have a good point there
[11:31] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 410310 in update-manager (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "update-manager inconsistent with download size (affects: 10) (dups: 3) (heat: 76)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/410310
[11:32] <mvo> thanks, let me check it out
[11:43] <mvo> evfool: indeed, he raises two good points
[11:43] <mvo> evfool: I think we need to change humanize_size to comply with https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UnitsPolicy
[11:44] <mvo> evfool: plus getting the decimal point thing from the locale
[11:44] <evfool> mvo: then also apt strutl has to be changed, as the factor is 1000.0 there
[11:45] <mvo> 1000.0 should be ok according to the unit policy 1kB = 1.000 bytes
[11:46] <evfool> mvo: right, sorry for that... couldn't we use then apt's strutl function in u-m, as u-m already depends on apt (AFAIK)
[11:47] <evfool> mvo: to avoid duplicating the code/writing the same thing in python ?
[11:47] <mvo> yeah, thats fine, if its doing the right thing, absolutely. loale.format(group=True) is the way to go with the locale
[11:48] <mvo> evfool: I haven't check if apt does the grouping as well, but I guess its not that important as the numbers are usually quite small
[11:48] <mvo> evfool: I'm all for using apt if it does all we need :)
[11:49] <evfool> mvo: thanks, I'll take a look, see what I can do about that, also assigning this one to me
[11:49] <mvo> great, thanks! let me know when its ready and I will merge or if you are getting stuck :)
=== kentb-out is now known as kentb
[13:07] <Laibsch> Can somebody running multihead setup in oneiric please test whether bug 379382 is still an issue? If not, I'd like to get the SRU ball rolling.
[13:07] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 379382 in gnome-utils (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "gnome-screenshot (Alt-Printscreen) black/blanks out top of windows in multi monitor xinerama (affects: 16) (heat: 74)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/379382
=== Ursinha` is now known as Ursinha
=== Ursinha is now known as Guest44940
=== Guest44940 is now known as Ursinha_
=== Ursinha_ is now known as Ursinha
=== brendand_ is now known as brendand
[14:55] <Ursinha> pedro_: hola :)
[14:55] <Ursinha> pedro_: I've created this branch in launchpad: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-defect-analysts/+junk/reports-trunk
[14:55] <Ursinha> pedro_: you can put your scripts there, than I can put mine
[14:55] <Ursinha> we can work together, together is nice :)
[14:58] <pedro_> Ursinha, bom dia, sure i'll propose a branch, thanks for creating it :-)
[14:59] <Ursinha> pedro_: buenos dias :) don't bother proposing a merge, I'll make that branch owned by the defect-analysts team and you'll have access to that
[14:59] <Ursinha> just put your scripts there and let's call it the 0 point :)
=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha`
=== Ursinha` is now known as ursinha`
=== ursinha` is now known as Ursinha
[15:04]  * hggdh is curious about the closed cycle above
[15:24] <bdmurray> pedro_: do you remember some bug about system users showing up in the display manager user's list?  I just saw Samba guest account.
[15:25] <pedro_> Ursinha, i've added some code to the branch
[15:25] <Ursinha> pedro_: cool :)
[15:26] <Ursinha> I'll take a look soon
[15:26] <pedro_> bdmurray, i don't recall something like that , will do some search and let you know
[15:27] <bdmurray> bug 696038
[15:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 696038 in gdm (Ubuntu Natty) (and 1 other project) "system user appears in login list of users (affects: 4) (heat: 24)" [Low,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/696038
[15:28] <pedro_> bdmurray, is the same happening with ligthdm?
[15:29] <bdmurray> pedro_: don't know I'm using gdm at the moment
[15:29] <pedro_> well if its still there with gdm that'd be nice to fix too
[15:29] <pedro_> could you please open a bug?
[15:30] <pedro_> im sure upstream would be interesting on it
[15:34] <bdmurray> bug 814139
[15:34] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 814139 in gdm (Ubuntu) "samba guest user appears in list of users (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/814139
[15:34] <pedro_> thanks
[15:34] <bdmurray> oh I didn't mention that other bug
[15:35] <pedro_> Folks remember that today is the Banshee bug day : https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay/20110721
[15:35] <pedro_> there's still a lot of bugs waiting to be squashed
[15:37] <bdmurray> pedro_: update the topic?
[15:37] <pedro_> oh right
[15:37] <pedro_> i'll put at the organizing instructions so we don't forget
=== pedro_ changed the topic of #ubuntu-bugs to: Today we're having a Banshee Bug Day! http://j.mp/oQJbrf join us! | Ubuntu Bug Squad - next meeting 8/11/11 | http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad | Documentation: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/HelpingWithBugs | Want to report a bug? Read https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs | User support (not related to triage) is in #ubuntu
=== paul_ is now known as Elbrus
[17:08] <charlie-tca> Is this really going to help or make it harder to find the bugs that really need work?
[17:08] <charlie-tca> http://blog.launchpad.net/bug-tracking/automatic-confirmation
[17:10] <brendand_> hmm, let's see
[17:10] <greg-g> charlie-tca: hopefully easier. It should allow those who only want to help triage bugs that have been confirmed see all bugs that have actually been confirmed (by dupiclate/me too's)
[17:11] <charlie-tca> I hope so. I see a lot of bugs marked confirmed that get ignored because they are confirmed already
[17:13] <micahg> well, I would think there's 2 steps to triage, 1. can the bug be reproduced, 2. does this bug have enough information to dig for a fix
[17:13] <charlie-tca> How many bugs in "Confirmed" do you look at as needing triaged?
[17:13] <hggdh> this is the problem with having so coarse granularity...
[17:14] <micahg> well, 1 is confirmed, 2 is triaged
[17:14] <hggdh> if there are 'me too's and/or dupes, then the bug should be initially confirmed, I agree with it
[17:15] <micahg> right
[17:15] <hggdh> may not have enough data to set it to triaged, though, and may be a red herring
[17:15] <charlie-tca> so, we think it should help then
[17:15] <hggdh> I think so, Charlie, out of the depths of my ignorance
[17:16] <charlie-tca> I just see a problem with too many bugs in "New" being moved to too many bugs in "Confirmed"
[17:16] <hggdh> there is a potential problem, yes
[17:17] <hggdh> this does not *solve* the issue of too many bugs needing triage, of course
[17:18] <micahg> well, this could potentially affect teams that use confirmed as triaged though
[17:18] <charlie-tca> agreed. Maybe my brain is working overtime again, seeing issues when they don't exist yet
[17:18] <hggdh> micahg: this is only for Ubuntu and LP
[17:18] <hggdh> Ubuntu should not use 'confirmed == triaged'
[17:19] <charlie-tca> at this time, they are going to decide whether or not to make it apply to all projects in launchpad
[17:19] <micahg> hggdh: ISTR X and kernel having confirmed meaning more than confirmed
[17:19] <hggdh> oh hell
[17:20]  * hggdh goes on grumbling about not having more status and substatus
[17:20] <charlie-tca> um, kernel does confirm without always being to reproduce, though, since so much is hardware specific there.
[17:20] <micahg> hggdh: have you filled out the bug survey yet?
[17:20] <hggdh> nope
[17:20] <hggdh> I am not sure I want to, the questions are not quite there
[17:20] <charlie-tca> hggdh: +1 on needing more/finer tuned status
[17:20] <yofel> charlie-tca: for kernel confirmed means the debug info is present, not that the bug is confirmed
[17:20]  * micahg thinks both of you need to fill out the survey
[17:21] <hggdh> micahg: you win ;-) I will do it
[17:21] <micahg> hggdh: hopefully we all win :)
[17:21] <hggdh> just got a bit unhappy with the questions, and decided to wait a bit to cool down
[17:21] <charlie-tca> yofel: that's what I meant to say.
[17:23] <yofel> k :)
[17:24] <bdmurray> hggdh: I'd be interested to hear why you are unhappy with the questions if you could send me an email.
[17:25] <bdmurray> charlie-tca: you too
[17:26] <brendand> bdmurray: i'd be happy to fill it out, if it applies to me. not sure where it is.
[17:30] <bdmurray> https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGZqcm9YS083V19XT1RSMmV1RFJ2U3c6MQ
[17:39] <brendand> bdmurray - thanks , filling it now
[17:39] <brendand> bdmurray - my personal pet peeve is duplicate detection
[18:08] <hggdh> bdmurray: done
[18:08] <hggdh> so you can pretty much find which answer is mine ;-)
[18:11] <bdmurray> I'm sure I'd be able to spot your lingo anywhere
[18:12] <hggdh> LOL
[18:27] <Ampelbein> hello there, bugsquad. I'm thinking about adding a pattern for bug #523896 in the bugpatterns file as there are loads of reports with the same installation problem (stale /etc/[passwd|group|shadow].lock). The pattern would look like http://paste.ubuntu.com/649356/ . Do you think this is a good idea?
[18:27] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 523896 in shadow (Ubuntu) "useradd: cannot lock /etc/passwd; try again later. (affects: 20) (dups: 7) (heat: 111)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/523896
[18:28] <Ampelbein> I'm a bit unsure if it is ok to just add such a pattern that would act on all (well, all apport-package) reports without discussing it first.
[18:48] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: I'm on a call but will look at it soon
[18:49] <Pici> w/22
[18:50] <Ampelbein> bdmurray: sure. Also, I would add the same pattern for DpkgTerminalLog (so that normal package installs are found as well). So the complete diff would be http://paste.ubuntu.com/649376/
[18:52] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: thanks for writing all the patterns you have
[18:53] <RedSingularity> bdmurray: I recall a discussion about this, but are we still marking 'invalid' due to inactivity or are we allowing the janitor to 'expire' it?
[18:54] <bdmurray> RedSingularity: just let the janitor do it
[18:54] <RedSingularity> bdmurray: very good.  Thanks.
[18:55] <Ampelbein> bdmurray: no problem. The more patterns we have the less time we spend on triaging known bugs.
[18:56] <Ampelbein> (And package installation are easy targets for patterns)
[19:02] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: indeed
[19:04] <Ampelbein> bdmurray: so, about the pattern. I think it will do the right thing, redirect issues of locked passwd/groups/shadow files to 523896 - they are not bugs in the package that cause the failure report.
[19:15] <bdmurray> bug 523896
[19:15] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 523896 in shadow (Ubuntu) "useradd: cannot lock /etc/passwd; try again later. (affects: 20) (dups: 7) (heat: 108)" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/523896
[19:15] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: looking now
[19:17] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: did you test it on any packages using search-bugs?
[19:20] <Ampelbein> bdmurray: I did try with ./test-local 813914 (a rtkit issue)
[19:21] <bdmurray> right, but search-bugs can also be useful for finding false positives
[19:22] <bdmurray> so think of a package that adds a user, postfix?, and check its bugs too
[19:22] <bdmurray>  ./search-bugs --package postfix --tags apport-package
[19:23] <Ampelbein> oh, right. False positive testing is important although I can't imagine a false match.
[19:23] <Ampelbein> Hmm, there is no option to search all bugs tagged apport-package?
[19:24] <bdmurray> no, it'd probably time out anyway ;-)
[19:24] <bdmurray> or maybe I did write that
[19:24]  * bdmurray looks
[19:24] <bdmurray> nope
[19:26] <Ampelbein> I'll do some tests against postfix, vsftp, courier and others I can think of that add users.
[19:27] <bdmurray> Looking at all my local DpkgTerminalLog.txt files there are only 25 matches
[19:27] <bdmurray> so I wouldn't worry too much
[19:28] <Ampelbein> say what? You have all DpkgTerminalLog.txt files from Launchpad on your computer? Wow, that's dedication ;-)
[19:28] <bdmurray> only from the open bugs ;-)
[19:30] <Ampelbein> nice
[19:41] <bdmurray> I think the pattern looks good though
[19:44] <Ampelbein> Ok, my testing didn't reveal any problem with the pattern and I think the explanation in 523896 is good enough to give people a hint what to do next.
[19:44] <Ampelbein> So I'll commit/push the changes.
[19:44] <Ampelbein> Thanks for your input, bdmurray.
[19:53] <nerd_bloke> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292203 has been marked as invalid against ppp, which project should it be assigned to for user creation with a usergroup membership?
[19:53] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 292203 in ppp (Ubuntu) "/usr/bin/pppd has group owner dip, not dialout (affects: 6) (dups: 2) (heat: 48)" [Undecided,Invalid]
[19:54] <bdmurray> Ampelbein: I think updating the description with the stuff from comment 12 could help us track it down too
[19:55] <Ampelbein> I agree, I will update the description
[19:56] <Ampelbein> But I will do that tomorrow, Bed is calling ;-)
[19:58] <Laibsch> bdmurray: from comment 12?
[20:00] <Laibsch> nerd_bloke: are you evgeniy
[20:00] <Laibsch> ?
[20:01] <Laibsch> that guy needs a chill pill (although I agree progress has been slow on that one, but that's no different from many other tickets)
[20:02] <Laibsch> nerd_bloke is also subscribed to the ticket apart from the OP, so I guess nerd_bloke is not evgeniy
[20:03] <Laibsch> I think it's probably best to open a new ticket and dupe 292203 to that one
[20:05] <Laibsch> bdmurray, Ampelbein: I now realize you were talking about something else entirely.
[20:08] <bdmurray> pedro_: what package tells me I have num lock on when logging in a locked system?
[20:09] <nerd_bloke> Laibsch: there are a few tickets floating around for modems on ubuntu/gnome, i'd prefer not to create more dupes
[20:09] <nerd_bloke> Laibsch: he has a point, it should be a group membership for the default member...
[20:09] <Laibsch> I'm not creating a dupe, at least that's not my intention.  But I want to start from a clean slate
[20:10] <Laibsch> I agree about the problem
[20:10] <nerd_bloke> Laibsch: but i don't know which team handles that side of things
[20:10] <Laibsch> but I want a fresh ticket so devs understand immediately what needs to be done and don't have to wade through the rant
[20:10] <Laibsch> I'm trying to figure out what package creates the first account on the system
[20:12] <Laibsch> I think I'll try my luck with "live-installer", seems like the most likely candidate
[20:17] <Laibsch> nerd_bloke: bug 814270 it is now
[20:17] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 814270 in live-installer (Ubuntu) "first user created on the system needs to be in dip group (affects: 7) (dups: 3) (heat: 44)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/814270
[20:18] <Laibsch> oh, duping now does transfer the "affects X users", cool!
[20:21] <nerd_bloke> Laibsch: thanks
=== kentb is now known as kentb-out
[23:43] <bdmurray> woot dpkg bugs under 100
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel