[00:00] Hm. That was apparently a bad time to update. It seems that everything I start from gnome-terminal sits in D state in rtnl_lock [00:00] retinal lock? [00:00] I don't know what crazy kernel internal bit that is :) [00:01] Ah, no. Maybe it's anything which hits some part of the networking stack… [00:04] Yeah, that's it. [00:08] It's not been a good couple of days for oneiric :( [00:09] so this is after a post-upgrade reboot? [00:10] slangasek: Yes. [00:11] well, doh [00:11] (And that was xchat-gnome dying for no obvious reason) :) [00:13] Hm. And the previous kernel doesn't seem to help at all. === elif is now known as elif_brb [00:31] But preventing network-manager from loading works. === elif_brb is now known as elif [01:03] RAOF: reading backlog, so NM issue or is it conclusively kernel? (or could it be libnl?) [01:03] cyphermox: Not conclusively kernel; switching to an older kernel doesn't change the issue. [01:04] cyphermox: Definitely related to NM in some way; disabling it (by killing /etc/init/network-manager.conf - running "stop network-manager" *also* hangs) and bringing up eth1 manually with dhclient works. [01:05] Might be related to libnl, or wireless. [01:05] huh, stop NM hangs? [01:05] that's probably not libnl or wireless :) [01:06] just in case, have you tried downgrading n-m to 0.8.9997+git.20110721t045648.36db194-0ubuntu1? [01:06] I've not yet tried that. I'll do so once my other stuff hits an appropriate checkpoint. [01:07] ok... let's still check something though; but let's do this in #ubuntu-desktop === elif is now known as elif_away [04:05] Good morning [04:05] tkamppeter: pong === ejat- is now known as ejat === ejat- is now known as ejat [06:25] pitti, hi [06:27] Can you upload CUPS to Debian and Ubuntu now? The first shot of PPD update centralization did not work (needed a small fix) and I have also found a bug which made some of the available PPDs not appea, rendering several hundreds of supported printers appearing unsupported. [06:27] pitti ^^ [06:32] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/2011-August/thread.html is a few days out of date [06:43] tkamppeter: ah, sure [06:54] tkamppeter: done [07:00] good morning [07:01] pitti, thanks. [07:23] hggdh: ping? [07:32] Sweetshark: I'm fairly sure he'd be asleep now === doko__ is now known as doko [07:39] Daviey: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches.txt has a whole lot of eucalyptus and dependencies that want to go to universe [07:40] Daviey: is that deliberate? switching to openstack now? [07:40] (or whatever the name was) [07:43] doko: got the message about translate-toolkit? [07:44] Sweetshark, no nothing seen yet [07:45] pitti: yes, jamespage opened a bug to try and speed it up aswell [07:46] bug 816408 [07:46] Launchpad bug 816408 in Ubuntu "Please demote eucalyptus to universe" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/816408 [07:46] Daviey: oh, the demotion can happen any time, that's not a problem [07:46] or time critical [07:46] I just wondered whether it was deliberate [07:46] pitti: it is deliberate [07:48] doko: the "remove Matthias Klose who is no longer involved in this package" wasnt me, it was upstream debian doing that [07:49] bah [07:51] nigelb, brian-murray, jorge, leannogasawara, pvilllavi: anyone awake who can prevent me from expiring in ubuntu-bugcontrol? [07:51] Sweetshark: do you expire today? [07:52] nigelb: no, it will be a few more days. [07:52] if not, I'm sure, one of those pings will hit somone who'll do it tomorrow morning [07:52] * Sweetshark checks ... [07:52] :) [07:52] Sweetshark: can you not renew yourself? I thought it allowed self renewewl? [07:54] wait, you summoned pedro_ ;) [07:55] Daviey: No bugcontrol is not self renewal [07:55] hey nigelb ;-) [07:55] Daviey: ugh, where would I find that in launchpad? I am asking for the guys named above at those are the ones proposed to me in the nagmail. [07:55] pedro_: Sweetshark wants his bc membership renewed :) [07:56] Sweetshark, just $5000 dollars ;-) [07:56] Wow. [07:56] lol [07:56] * nigelb goes to blog about corruption in the community :P [07:56] $1000 ought to do it though. [07:56] pedro_: You just can't ask for that much. [07:56] Sweetshark, what's the lp id? [07:56] pedro_: wait a few more month, when the fed has printed enough, I might comply ;D [07:56] iulian, oh well, with the financial crisis and all that... we have to raise the price :-P [07:57] pedro_: bjoern-michaelsen [07:57] iulian: I think the trick is to start high and then negotiate to something like 0$ :P [07:57] Heh. [07:57] pedro_: all of QA at the sprint? [07:58] Sweetshark, renewed ;-) [07:58] pedro_: thanks [07:58] nigelb, nope, just the defect analysts [07:58] pedro_: nice :) === smb` is now known as smb [08:07] * ogra_ hugs pitti seeing the last u-meta upload .... does gnome-user-guide stay off the images permanently now ? [08:07] ogra_: well, at least until the docs team switches back to having everything tehre :) [08:07] hrm [08:07] but as we just switched back and forth, I guess it'll stay that way now, and it seems to make more sense [08:07] sad, i was hoping ... [08:08] ogra_: I guess it's one of the packages which take a week to unpack? [08:08] it is the one package that makes SD card based rootfses scream [08:08] takes about 20min to unpack here [08:08] right :) [08:08] * ogra_ types to slow today [08:22] Is there an archive admin channel anymore? [08:23] Was there ever? [08:24] I seem to recall there being one otherwise I wouldn't have asked. ;-) [08:24] I don't recall ever having been in one, but I may have missed the memo. ;) [08:24] Anyway I'm curious about how to get a package removed from the archive. [08:24] File a bug, subscribe us. [08:24] I'm willing to bet there might even be a cute helper tool for the bug filing, but not sure. [08:25] I'd imagine just saying I think this package should be removed isn't quite enough though. What type of content should I include? [08:26] Whatever justification you have, really. [08:26] "It was removed from Debian, and we have no interest in maintaining it in Ubuntu" is a good one. [08:26] If it's Ubuntu-specific "we don't maintain it, and neither does MOTU" works. [08:27] It it's still in Debian, but complete crack, then a longer justification would be needed, along with a reminder to blacklist it from syncs. [08:28] Fails to start, has 1 star in software center and hasn't been updated since lucid and has lots of crash reports? [08:28] All of that sounds like bug reports to me. We could, y'know, fix it. [08:29] One star doesn't mean much to me. [08:29] We have tons of software no one would ever install from Software Centre. [08:30] And "lots of crash reports" sounds like it's used. [08:30] but is it maintained? [08:30] Right we could fix it but the bugs have been around forever bug 132636 and bug 703556 [08:30] Launchpad bug 132636 in balazar (Ubuntu) "Balazar crashes with soya3d error: invalid GL_ENUM" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/132636 [08:30] Launchpad bug 703556 in balazar (Ubuntu) "Balazar fails to load soya, doesn't run on Natty " [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/703556 [08:30] So we haven't gotten around to fixing it yet [08:32] hi [08:33] SyntaxError: ("'continue' not properly in loop", ('/usr/share/apport/package-hooks/source_ubiquity.py', 30, None, 'continue\n')) [08:33] hrw: Already fixed. [08:33] thx [08:33] hrw: Upgrade with an up-to-date mirror. :) [08:34] infinity: ok [08:34] bdmurray: I'm just playing devil's advocate here, to be fair. I suspect that the glaring bugs could be fixed pretty quickly if someone took the time. And our maintainerless system does tend to let things fall through the cracks, which is a bit irksome. [08:35] bdmurray: Also, given that I don't see those particular error in the Debian BTS, either the problem is Ubuntu-specific (quite likely), or more Ubuntu users use it than Debian ones. Either way, it hasn't been updated in Debian because it's not RC buggy there. [08:35] (Though I'm not sure it's hugely well-maintained in Debian either, from the looks of it) [08:35] Meh. [08:36] doko, did you mean to score your archive rebuilds over normal ppa builds? [08:36] bdmurray: (It could just be that it needs to be rebuilt or something if it links against stuff that's been changing under its feet) [08:36] seb128, yes, in batches of 200 [08:37] :-( [08:37] until main is built [08:37] doko, ok, pitti helped, but dx has been blocked since yesterday to get their compiz ffe update building to be able to test it [08:37] that sucks [08:37] that's blocking people to get real work done [08:38] but at the same time the rebuild test isn't very useful if it's not getting through quickly [08:38] fixing build failures is real work. soyuz sucks [08:38] and frankly, I consider the rebuild test more urgent than daily maverick chromium/firefox builds [08:38] we can still manually score up the urgent ones [08:38] pitti, why not? what difference does it make if it tests tomorrow's version of a source rather than yesterday's? [08:38] and there are 10 non-working machines, which are not given back currently [08:39] seb128: because these builds are already queued, so you wouldn't test tomorrow's source [08:39] bdmurray: Actually, looking more closely, the balazar issues on Ubuntu look to be in soya, not balazar. [08:39] seb128: you'd get build failure reports which were already fixed in a newer version [08:40] pitti, ok, fair enough, I guess I will just nag you today for dx when they have builds they need, I want that compiz ffe sorted [08:40] just a bit annoyed that they wasted half a day waiting for builds [08:40] seb128: sure [08:40] pitti, danke ;-) [08:44] seb128, pick up your favourite build failures at http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-20110816-oneiric.html ;p [08:45] xvfb-run: error: Xvfb failed to start [08:45] awesome [08:46] that might hit a few test suites [08:46] doko, do you want a list of the ones we (desktop) can look at? [08:46] seb128: There are package sets on that page now. [08:46] Which may be relevant. [08:46] Don't we break xvfb-run every second release? [08:46] seb128, I assume that would be the ubuntu-desktop package set? [08:46] wgrant, where? [08:46] seb128: Should be links at the top to lists down the bottom. [08:46] oh, tooltip under the checkmark [08:46] Also that, yeah, but there are per-packageset lists down the bottom. [08:47] And FTBFS bugs are shown too, if present. [08:47] doko, wgrant: ok, thanks [08:47] we will look at the desktop ones [08:47] ScottK: same for the kubuntu ones [08:47] Daviey, and the server ones ... [08:48] doko, pitti: seems mono is not installable on amd64, that will be leading to quite some builds issues as well [08:48] it's because it failed to build on i386 and there is an arch all,any mismatch for the binaries [08:48] yeah, see http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/testing/oneiric_probs.html [08:48] it doesn't seem to be all mono afaics [08:48] not all, but a few are [08:49] as directhex, he did ask for the sync [08:49] there is a least 5 of the desktop ones due to it [08:49] Laney was looking at it I think [08:50] Laney and directhex mentioned it yesterday. [08:50] I think. [08:50] doko: I've already got it open :) [08:51] it's maddening. it only fails on ubuntu's i386 builders. it's not reproducible on debian's builders or locally [08:51] directhex: the buildds run on the lucid kernel, might that be related? [08:52] directhex: was a rebuild already tried? i. e. not just gamma rays? [08:52] pitti, yes. and it fails on two different buildds [08:53] infinity: do the PPA builds "see" a different kernel due to the virtualization? [08:53] i. e. in such cases, is it worth trying a build in a PPA to see whether it's any different? [08:53] it builds in an oneiric ppa. i can fling it at a lucid ppa? [08:54] PPA kernels don't differ by series. [08:54] directhex: that's what I meant [08:54] directhex: an oneiric build in an oneiric PPA might actually use an oneiric kernel in the VM [08:54] It doesn't. [08:54] directhex: while on the ubuntu builders it uses the lucid kernel [08:55] wgrant: ah, these don't use kvm then? [08:55] or xen? [08:55] I think all the VMs are Lucid kernels, but it's complicated due to Xen. [08:55] pitti: There is a Lucid VM, with a $series chroot. [08:55] ah, right, with Xen client-side kernels are optional [08:55] wgrant: I see [08:55] thanks [08:55] wgrant: so that pretty much rules out a kernel issue then [08:55] we had that problem with glib (failed on a too old kernel) [08:55] The PPA VMs may well be running a somewhat custom kernel, but who knows... [08:56] We've had issues with mono on Xen before. [08:56] But not, AFAICR, a situation where it worked on Xen but not on bare metal :) [08:56] rothera and vernadsky have similar hardware? [08:56] They're both bases. [08:56] So within a year or so, probably. [08:57] Both should be i386 kernels. [08:57] and the other three builders? which of them is significantly different? [08:57] pitti, the glib issue was happening on ppa builds as well [08:57] directhex: roseapple and zirconium are very different. [08:57] * pitti always chuckles when he sees DMI info in bug reports with "MachineType: To Be Filled By O.E.M. To Be Filled By O.E.M." [08:57] directhex: roseapple may be an amd64 kernel. [08:58] directhex: zirconium was originally an lpia builder, so I don't know what it is. [08:58] Hello, why doesn't Ubuntu sync the openbios-* packages from Debian ? [08:58] doko: I see last time you raised ftbfs bugs based on the rebuild, are you doing that again? [08:58] Daviey, later this week [08:58] can we briefly disable vernadsky etc, and jab the rebuild button, so it goes on roseapple or zirconium? [08:59] Sure, I can do that. Which build? [08:59] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mono/2.10.4-2/+build/2687881 [08:59] directhex, set to manual, please upload [09:00] doko, i need to upload a 2build1? [09:00] No, it's queued now. [09:00] doko: Are you doing them manually, or scripted? [09:00] no, we just need to retry [09:00] Should start in 5s or so. [09:00] Currently building on roseapple [09:00] okay, cool. let's see how this goes [09:00] scripted, but need to check the script first ... [09:01] (I manualled zirconium too, because I trust roseapple more) [09:01] all my local test builds have been on an amd64 kernel. i think Laney was working on an i386 VM [09:01] Everything back to auto. [09:01] i eagerly await the result :/ [09:01] directhex: don't watch the build log, lest it takes forever :) [09:02] it was 40 minutes on vernadsky. i expect less time on faster tin [09:04] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/openbios-ppc <- why aren't there binaries generated for openbios-* packages ? [09:05] AnAnt: failed to build [09:05] AnAnt, sounds like the old "can't build arch:all packages on non-i386" issue [09:05] https://launchpadlibrarian.net/70891377/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.openbios-ppc_1.0%2Bsvn1018-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [09:05] "This package must be built on a PowerPC machine" [09:05] aha [09:06] the VM build succeeded [09:06] pitti, directhex: thanks [09:06] Laney, which kernel? [09:06] O [09:06] 3.0.0-7 [09:06] install an l kernel? [09:06] -generic-pae [09:06] yeah, said that yesterday [09:07] pitti: Nearly all (or maybe all by now) of the PPA machines are amd64, while the i386 distro buildds are actually i386, that's probably the difference. [09:09] ah, good to know [09:09] infinity: Even roseapple? [09:09] infinity: I thought it was amd64. [09:10] (it appeared while you were gone) [09:10] wgrant: Oh, roseapple's new. And almost certainly amd64 hardware. No idea what kernel it's running, though. [09:10] wgrant: rothera and vernadsky are both i386 for sure, though. [09:10] Yup. [09:11] IIRC palmer is a little nicer than them, but still i386. [09:11] That said, "building on amd64 to make it work" is the wrong answer. If we still ship and support i386, we should figure out why things don't work there. [09:12] infinity, agreed - but how long do you want to hang around & wait, with a messed up archive? [09:12] sigh, the only i386 tin in the house has a maverick kernel [09:13] directhex: I'm not averse to workarounds, but I'm wary of workarounds that then lead to people forgetting about and not fixing bugs. [09:13] et voila, it just got past the failure point [09:14] morning - please could someone with appropriate perms poke the package importer for the jenkins source package - it borked with a TooManyConcurrentRequests error. [09:17] jamespage: if nobody appropriate responds here, file a bug on bugs.launchpad.net/udd [09:17] cjwatson: OK - thanks for the advice [09:19] jamespage: In other news, did you see that slangasek was looking at porting the cdbs maven support into dh? [09:19] Daviey: nope - missed that one [09:20] I know its on the list for the debian-java team [09:20] but I don't think anyone is working on it ATM [09:25] @pilot in === udevbot changed the topic of #ubuntu-devel to: Alpha 3 released | Archive: Feature Freeze | Development of Ubuntu (not support, not app development) | build failures -> http://bit.ly/or6CHJ | #ubuntu for support and general discussion for hardy -> oneiric | #ubuntu-app-devel for application development on Ubuntu | http://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment | See #ubuntu-bugs for http://bit.ly/lv8soi | Patch Pilots: dholbach [09:26] jamespage, could you have a look at component mismatches, and confirm the demotion of all the java packages? [09:26] doko: already discussed with Daviey, and demoted [09:26] doko: ack - I'll take a look now [09:26] doko: it's due to the demotion of eucalyptus [09:26] ahh, ok [09:26] bug 816408 [09:26] Launchpad bug 816408 in Ubuntu "Please demote eucalyptus to universe" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/816408 [09:26] jamespage: ^ [09:27] pitti: stopping looking now... [09:29] jamespage, is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/antlr3/+bug/814819 something the release team should have a look into? is it a bugfix release only? [09:29] Ubuntu bug 814819 in antlr3 (Ubuntu) "Update to antlr3 version 3.2" [Low,New] [09:31] dholbach: its not bugfix only - 3.0 -> 3.2 made quite a few changes [09:31] dholbach: just thinking about the best way to deal with this package [09:32] jamespage, is there anything that needs to be transitioned after the update? [09:35] dholbach: it only has a few reverse-build-depends [09:35] so it would be minimal [09:36] Finished a moment ago (took 35 minutes, 16.5 seconds) [09:36] infinity, wgrant ^ [09:36] also pitti i guess [09:36] yay [09:36] jamespage, maybe it'd be good to list those reverse-build-deps and what needs to be done to them and add something like a NEWS file diff to the bug, so the release team can have a second look - I'm happy to deal with it from a sponsoring POV [09:37] dholbach: OK - I'll stick it on my list [09:38] * dholbach hugs jamespage [09:38] I'll subscribe to it [09:39] what's the correct way to supersede a package? Is it the Provides, Conflicts, Replaces trifecta or is simply declaring Replaces sufficient? [09:39] ev: for permanently obsoleting it, Conflicts:/Replaces: [09:39] pitti, that should get the archive running again. we're scrambling to reproduce the issue locally, still [09:40] ev: "Provides:" if it's a binary compatible drop-in replacement, or just a newer choice [09:40] thanks jamespage [09:40] ev: just replaces: wouldn't cause package removal, just file overwriting [09:40] provides: doesn't help for versioned depends though [09:40] dholbach: np [09:40] iirc [09:44] poolie: hey, which thinkpad model do you have? [09:47] poolie: asking since I noticed that on 745112 you reported of a similar issue which is now reported as a regression on the kernel from natty-proposed, bug 814325 [09:47] Launchpad bug 814325 in Linux "fuzzy and corrupted display with update in natty-proposed" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/814325 [09:48] pitti: you're a star; thanks [09:54] poolie: ah, X201 I guess? could you still read through that other bug and post your findings there, and if possible, test oneiric to see if you can reproduce the regression [09:56] ugh, what's up with LP? It keeps logging me out, and fails to change bug states, add comments, etc. [09:57] poolie: we've had a hard time getting it confirmed on any other hw, so it would be great to find another machine and then figure out what's common with those setups. thanks! [10:02] pitti: I'm seeing the same thing. Just raised it in #launchpad [10:11] pitti: Should be fixed now. [10:11] pitti: Poke henninge in #launchpad if that's not the case. [10:11] thanks! [10:11] I'm just the messenger :) [10:30] cjwatson, hey Colin - how are you doing? how do you feel about merging debhelper 8.9.4 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/debhelper/+bug/812120)? AFAICS it consists entirely of bug fixes [10:30] Ubuntu bug 812120 in debhelper (Ubuntu) "Please merge debhelper 8.9.4 from Debian unstable" [Undecided,Confirmed] [10:31] I think it needs an FFE for safety's sake [10:32] debhelper merges should not be just waved through at this point IMO [10:32] ok, no worries, I'll add some info and subscribe the release team and make sure that it's OK from a sponsoring POV [10:32] the changes in 8.9.4 look subtle, especially the buildflags change, and personally I would rather defer it unless there is a clear reason [10:33] Ahmed should be giving explicit justifications for merging debhelper at this point [10:33] i.e. "it will fix these build problems over here" [10:33] ok, I'm happy to point this out [10:33] thanks [10:34] * cjwatson goes back to the NBS slog [10:34] unfortunately the consecutive merges have been overlooked for about a month, but still he should add some justification [10:34] although it seems he forgot so subscribe sponsors [10:34] thanks cjwatson [10:34] argh, python-elementary, stop failing to build [10:35] oh, chroot problem [10:38] smacking buildds around a bit [10:50] doko: alive? [10:52] hrw: ohh, do I get the arm biarch patch? [10:53] doko: sorry, next week - I work remotely nto my main machine now ;( [10:53] doko: I had an issue with cross binutils build but it was just missing deps on my side. sorry [10:56] dholbach: could you have a look at bug #827489, it's a fix for a regression introduced in the last udev upload [10:56] Launchpad bug 827489 in udev (Ubuntu) "Bluetooth keyboards and mice stopped working in X server" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/827489 [10:57] seb128, directhex: which packages in the test rebuild archive should be given back now that mono did build? [10:57] doko, is there a list? [10:58] debfx, sure [10:58] directhex, sure, see the topic [10:59] gnome-sharp2 gtk-sharp2 libappindicator launchpad-integration linindicate libreoffice libubuntuone nunit [10:59] banshee [11:00] anything in main which reverse-build-depends on mono-devel [11:01] Laney, libreoffice ftbfs on i386 too [11:01] Sweetshark, ^^^ [11:02] mono-devel : Depends: libmono-cil-dev (= 2.10.3-1) but it is not going to be installed [11:02] sounds like skew [11:06] thanks! given back [11:06] doko, Laney: yes, mono-deps in LO are a mess. [11:06] i'd like to see a build log [11:06] but it's probably best to disable those bindings [11:06] Laney: already done [11:07] not uploaded though? [11:08] Laney: https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen/+archive/libreoffice-oneirictest-20110718/+sourcepub/1859989/+listing-archive-extra [11:08] Sweetshark, why not test it in the distro? [11:08] cool [11:09] Laney: nope, not uploaded. Needs a FFe (because I wasted so much time with mono :/), and I still need to get the LO-l10n to build ... [11:09] * Sweetshark crosses fingers (145/152 modules done) [11:11] last time i tried to test-build OOo to debug mono problems, it was just filled with fail in other places, so i gave up. couldn't rebuild it locally at all. [11:11] the mono stuff seems to be mixing mono1 headers and mono2 tooling, which is a path to doom anyway likely. [11:12] directhex: the official binary downloads on libreoffice.org do not have mono either, but debian does (and we did), so I tried to keep it alive. [11:12] i suspect upstream no longer cares for that [11:12] lamont, if it's smacking time, please smack the builds on dubnium and hassium too so that I can downscore these [11:13] Sweetshark, the bindings were part of go-oo, but not ooo upstream [11:13] cjwatson, I'll have a look at your meta-gnome2 update - seems we like had a mid-air collision, when I uploaded a merge from debian earlier [11:13] slangasek: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fontconfig/+bug/828014 seems to hit some people switching to multiarch; on my system, /usr/share/doc/libfontconfig1/AUTHORS is a (looping) symlink to ../libfontconfig1/AUTHORS, but that's not what the .deb ship and I couldn't find any maintainer snippet creating these symlinks at install time, so I'm a bit puzzled; if I compare the .debs for i386 they both ship a real file, and the contentsmatch [11:14] Ubuntu bug 828014 in fontconfig (Ubuntu) "package libfontconfig1 2.8.0-3ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: './usr/share/doc/libfontconfig1/AUTHORS' is different from the same file on the system" [Undecided,Confirmed] [11:14] directhex: most of go-oo patches have been migrated to the main LO repos though -- but mono wasnt. [11:14] Sweetshark, i think that's politics [11:15] directhex: it is ;) [11:15] Daviey, pitti: eucalyptus-commons-ext is still in main [11:15] plus ca change [11:16] dholbach: I think that merge dealt with a small part of it but that there's still more to go [11:16] * Sweetshark is "member of the engineering steering commitee" for LO [11:16] directhex: I see enough politics [11:16] cjwatson, yep - will have a look [11:16] dholbach: I saw the existing merge but decided that I was going to want somebody who knew GNOME to look at it anyway :-) [11:16] doko, Daviey: demoting [11:16] slangasek: hmm this might be due to a temporary loss of the Debian diff [11:17] Sweetshark, i find it particularly amusing when LO/OOo eat microsoft's lunch, and mono doesn't. which is the bigger "danger" to MS's bottom line? therefore which has a bigger target painted on its back? [11:17] doko / pitti: thanks! [11:24] directhex: well, but for the same reason other 800lb gorillas (*cough* IBM *cough*) still care about LO/OOo and might go nuclear in a patent shootout too. mono was always a novell only show -- nobody cared for it, as everyone else used java (either from sun, or their own impl.). [11:25] true [11:46] hi tjaalton, i've since upgraded my laptop to oneiric [11:48] poolie: ah, ok. do you get the same regression though? [11:49] tkamppeter: Thanks for the fixes to my patch; it was needed indeed. [11:49] doko: The fixes you suggested for MIR of bug # [11:49] .oO(I spent 2 hours yesterday trying to fix those issues and ended seeing that you had committed that already. :-/ ) [11:49] tjaalton: actually i have been seeing that, i think even on oneiric [11:49] doko: bug 825110 have just been uploaded, would you mind ack'ing the MIR if you are happy please? [11:49] on 3.0.0-7 or -8 [11:49] Launchpad bug 825110 in prettytable (Ubuntu) "[MIR] prettytable" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/825110 [11:50] i thought i filed another bug (which would be a dupe of this) [11:50] ... but thinking back i actually i did not [11:54] Daviey, ok, will do [11:55] poolie: ok, could you post your findings on the newer bug I mentioned, it would be valuable to find another machine with this issue.. [11:55] err, we found that, but would be nice for others to know about it too :) [12:02] tjaalton: xchat crashed, that was exciting [12:02] anyhow, i can reproduce some similar stuff [12:03] poolie: ok, that might still be relevant to the bug [12:03] doko: thanks! [12:03] 14:55 < tjaalton> poolie: ok, could you post your findings on the newer bug I mentioned, it would be valuable to find another machine with this issue.. [12:03] 14:55 < tjaalton> err, we found that, but would be nice for others to know about it too :) [12:03] bug 814325? [12:04] Launchpad bug 814325 in Linux "fuzzy and corrupted display with update in natty-proposed" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/814325 [12:04] i'll boot it up and see if that's actually true [12:05] poolie: yep [12:06] there's a simple script to help in reproducing the issue [12:07] cyphermox: are you planning an evo upload soon? if not, I'll take care of bug 828693 later today [12:07] Launchpad bug 828693 in evolution (Ubuntu) "Uses wrong path for spamd binary" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/828693 [12:09] ok [12:09] 615MB of updates first [12:09] (!) [12:09] hehe [12:15] Daviey, package new'ed, will promote it in the next cycle [12:17] Sweetshark: pong [12:19] hggdh: thanks, already solved it was about my expiring bugcontrol membership. [12:19] Sweetshark: ah, OK. [12:20]