| idnar | uh, so, I don't want to be That Guy, but this new font seems really terrible | 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| idnar | kerning and hinting / smoothing seem totally out of whack, at least at the resolutions I have available to me | 00:00 |
| wgrant | idnar: Using a recent version of Firefox? | 00:02 |
| mwhudson | idnar: a change landed to improve things on ff overnight | 00:02 |
| wgrant | Oh look, it's deployable. | 00:03 |
| wgrant | Let's deploy it. | 00:03 |
| idnar | wgrant: I'm running latest Aurora on OS X, and a recentish Aurora on Linux | 00:03 |
| wgrant | Yeah. | 00:04 |
| wgrant | Firefox 6 and Chromium anything seem to fall back to a sensible font OK. | 00:04 |
| wgrant | But Firefox 7 and later don't. | 00:04 |
| wgrant | Not sure if it's a bug. | 00:04 |
| idnar | hmm, why would they fall back? | 00:05 |
| wgrant | We are only providing the medium weight, when we use bold and italic and bold-italic variants. | 00:05 |
| idnar | ah, I see | 00:05 |
| wgrant | The terrible font you see is probably the medium variant being scaled to bold. | 00:05 |
| idnar | yeha, the non-medium weights are really awful | 00:05 |
| idnar | the kerning seems off even for medium weight, though | 00:06 |
| wgrant | Hmm. How does font.ubuntu.com look? | 00:06 |
| wgrant | I don't have an OS X machine, but it looks mostly fine on Windows for me. | 00:07 |
| wgrant | As fine as Windows browser rendering tends to be. | 00:07 |
| idnar | font.ubuntu.com looks fine, but I can't seem to go smaller than 16 there | 00:07 |
| wgrant | What about the body text? | 00:07 |
| wgrant | Below the selectors. | 00:08 |
| wgrant | That's the same font, but smaller. | 00:08 |
| idnar | that seems to have the same problem | 00:08 |
| idnar | on my laptop which has a higher display resolution (as in dpi), it looks better, but spacing still seems weird | 00:09 |
| idnar | small clip from my desktop machine (running Debian / Aurora): http://bucket.mithrandi.net/launchpad-font.png | 00:09 |
| wgrant | Urgh, that's awful. | 00:11 |
| * wgrant hacks around in dconf, since GNOME 3 has removed the DPI option. | 00:12 | |
| lifeless | do they hardcode 72dpi full stop, or actually trust the X metrics now ? | 00:13 |
| lifeless | cause 72dpi on a 144dpi screen is awful | 00:13 |
| wgrant | They used to hardcode 96dpi. | 00:13 |
| wgrant | It *seems* to be smaller now. | 00:14 |
| idnar | GNOME on my system uses the X metrics | 00:14 |
| idnar | er | 00:14 |
| idnar | wait | 00:14 |
| idnar | damnit. | 00:14 |
| wgrant | You might think that, but you could well be wrong :) | 00:14 |
| wgrant | For ages it completely ignored them. | 00:15 |
| idnar | resolution is 85dpi in GNOME, but xdpyinfo reports 95x94 dpi | 00:15 |
| wgrant | Then it used them for a while. | 00:15 |
| wgrant | Then it stopped. | 00:15 |
| wgrant | What if you zoom up one level in Firefox? | 00:15 |
| idnar | it looks different, but still not great | 00:16 |
| idnar | I think I need to restart Firefox for my font rendering to be completely fixed now that I've fiddled with the dpi settings | 00:16 |
| idnar | fwiw, in Chrome 15 (dev channel), I seem to get Ubuntu used for bold / italic text, same as in Firefox | 00:17 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Is this the fix that nigelb did that isn't deployed? | 00:17 |
| wgrant | Odd, Chrome 13 on both Windows and Linux works OK. | 00:17 |
| wgrant | StevenK: Yes. | 00:17 |
| idnar | hmmm, Firefox seems to be ignoring GNOME font rendering settings completely | 00:19 |
| idnar | so that made no difference | 00:19 |
| idnar | ignoring them for the content rendering, I mean (the UI chrome *is* affected) | 00:20 |
| wgrant | people.canonical.com/~wgrant/fonts-seem-ok.png is what it looks like for me when it's that small. | 00:20 |
| wgrant | Bah, Firefox now has Chromium disease. | 00:20 |
| wgrant | Who needs URI schemes anyway. | 00:20 |
| idnar | heh | 00:20 |
| idnar | it tries to put the scheme back in for you when you copy, but fails a lot of the time | 00:21 |
| wgrant | Yeah, the second time I copied it worked. | 00:21 |
| lifeless | users don't understand uris | 00:25 |
| lifeless | </unsubstantiatedclaim> | 00:25 |
| wgrant | idnar: Is Chrome's rendering any better, ignoring the weight issue? | 00:26 |
| idnar | it seems about the same as Firefox (on my laptop, running OS X) | 00:29 |
| idnar | Firefox: http://mithrandi.smugmug.com/Other/Scratch/i-nFJGWXP/0/O/Screen-Shot-2011-09-09-at.png | 00:30 |
| idnar | Chrome: http://mithrandi.smugmug.com/Other/Scratch/i-nsHg9cR/0/O/Screen-Shot-2011-09-09-at.png | 00:30 |
| idnar | you can see that it's not rendered the same way, but I'm not sure it's any better or worse | 00:30 |
| wgrant | It seems yto be almost correctly kerned and hinted, but it's really really heavy. | 00:31 |
| wgrant | How odd. | 00:31 |
| wgrant | Since that page has all the variants. | 00:31 |
| wgrant | idnar: lenny, wheezy or sid? | 00:33 |
| wgrant | Er. | 00:33 |
| wgrant | s/lenny/squeeze/ | 00:33 |
| idnar | sid on my desktop | 00:33 |
| wgrant | I don't have a recent desktop Debian VM around. I shall install one and try stuff out. | 00:36 |
| exarkun | lifeless: I have an aversion to destroying data. I suppose I don't really need them, but I would feel better hiding them than removing them. | 00:37 |
| wgrant | idnar: http://people.canonical.com/~wgrant/lp-fonts/firefox-win/lp.png http://people.canonical.com/~wgrant/lp-fonts/firefox-win/font.ubuntu.com.png are Firefox 6 on Windows. Not fantastic, but I never really liked Windows font rendering anyway. | 00:49 |
| wgrant | Wheezy is still installing... | 00:49 |
| wgrant | Also, you can see the latest font changes on qastaging.launchpad.net. | 00:53 |
| lifeless | exarkun: do you want to hide the release as well ? | 01:46 |
| lifeless | exarkun: if not, could you expand on why ? | 01:46 |
| exarkun | Sure, hiding the release sounds good. | 01:46 |
| lifeless | I believe there is a checkbox for that | 01:47 |
| lifeless | I would expect it to hide the downloads associated with the release too | 01:47 |
| * exarkun looks around | 01:47 | |
| exarkun | I see an "Active" checkbox for a milestone | 01:49 |
| lifeless | mmm no, thats related to whether bugs can be targeted | 01:49 |
| * lifeless has a poke | 01:50 | |
| lifeless | nope | 01:50 |
| lifeless | exarkun: looks like I'm wrong and we don't support this | 01:51 |
| exarkun | okay | 01:51 |
| exarkun | thanks for checking | 01:51 |
| lifeless | exarkun: I suggest filing a bug noting that you can't hide releases/downloads - including a reason why you want to hide-but-not-delete them. | 01:51 |
| exarkun | I'm not sure I can give a reason for wanting to hide but not delete them. | 01:52 |
| lifeless | if its hidden we have to answer questions like 'who can see hidden $thing' and 'who can unhide them again' | 01:52 |
| exarkun | Yea, understandable. | 01:53 |
| === jussi01_ is now known as jussi | ||
| === michaelh1 is now known as michaelh1|away | ||
| mrevell | Hallo | 08:01 |
| wgrant | We're about to go down for a couple of minutes for a database upgrade. | 08:42 |
| wgrant | And we're back. | 08:45 |
| === chrisccoulson_ is now known as chrisccoulson | ||
| geser | wgrant: Hi, an user in #ubuntu-packaging is asking why his packages in his PPA are in pending (not published yet) | 10:07 |
| geser | I'm guessing it's about https://launchpad.net/~ambrop7/+archive/badvpn/+packages | 10:07 |
| ambro718 | Hi. How long is it supposed for a PPA package to get over "pending publication"? My package finished building 7 hours ago and it's still pending. | 10:09 |
| wgrant | Hmm, that's not good. Let me check some logs. | 10:10 |
| ambro718 | this is the package in question https://launchpad.net/~ambrop7/+archive/badvpn/+packages | 10:10 |
| wgrant | ambro718: You don't see any warnings at the top of https://launchpad.net/~ambrop7/+archive/badvpn? | 10:10 |
| ambro718 | wgrant: warnings? no. | 10:11 |
| ambro718 | I did once accidentally delete the PPA but then re-enabled it; could that have left it in a strange state? | 10:11 |
| bigjools | yes | 10:12 |
| wgrant | It should still work, but yes, it will bein a strange state. | 10:12 |
| wgrant | ambro718: https://launchpad.net/~ambrop7/+archive/badvpn/+edit, check that the Publish flag is enabled. | 10:12 |
| wgrant | ambro718: But don't rely on undeleting PPAs. | 10:12 |
| wgrant | That it works at all is a bug. | 10:12 |
| === jussi01_ is now known as jussi | ||
| ambro718 | wgrant: thanks' I checked that flag | 10:13 |
| ambro718 | why is my PPA not building for ARM? https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+ppas says that it's supported, and my control file has Architecture: any | 10:24 |
| bigjools | ambro718: because you need special permission to use ARM | 10:25 |
| ambro718 | bigjools: ah, ok. Don't really need it yet, just asking. | 10:25 |
| === jelmer is now known as Guest27145 | ||
| ambro718 | how is PPA building for ARM? does it use actual ARM hardware, or emulation? | 10:26 |
| bigjools | actual hardware | 10:26 |
| ambro718 | and which hardware is fast enough for that? | 10:27 |
| lifeless | hahhahaahaha | 10:27 |
| bigjools | none of them? :) | 10:27 |
| === Guest27145 is now known as jelmer_ | ||
| geser | when I try to view the "inline" package details on a source package in LP, I get a "Failed to fetch package details". Is this known? | 10:48 |
| geser | with Firebug I see a request for +listing-archive-extra which gives a 404 | 10:49 |
| geser | e.g https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-dev-tools/+sourcepub/1931343/+listing-archive-extra | 10:49 |
| geser | when trying to expand 0.129 on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-dev-tools/+index | 10:50 |
| lifeless | geser: I believe there is a bug | 10:50 |
| === matsubara-afk is now known as matsubara | ||
| === apachelogger_ is now known as apachelogger | ||
| wgrant | geser: It works for me. DO you have an archive_context_url set in LP.cache down near the bottom of the page? | 11:38 |
| bigjools | works for me too | 11:41 |
| bigjools | and woo, it closed bugs. My code works! | 11:42 |
| wgrant | bigjools: Excellent. | 11:45 |
| nigelb | bigjools: \o/ | 11:47 |
| Daviey | Is it viable to try to replicate a local instance of just the buildd part of soyuz to test some build failures? (They are working in sbuild/pbuilder) | 11:48 |
| bigjools | it's not easy but possible. | 11:48 |
| bigjools | https://dev.launchpad.net/Soyuz/HowToUseSoyuzLocally | 11:48 |
| Daviey | Hmm, thanks bigjools | 11:51 |
| StevenK | Daviey: What sort of failures? | 11:56 |
| StevenK | If it works under sbuild, it ought to build ... | 11:56 |
| bigjools | could be a Xen bug | 11:57 |
| wgrant | StevenK: Well, if it works under our 7 year old fork of sbuild... | 11:58 |
| StevenK | Yes, we should fix that. | 11:58 |
| StevenK | bigjools kept threatning me with it, but now I'm IMMUNE | 11:58 |
| geser | wgrant: http://paste.ubuntu.com/685895/ for the LP.cache line from that page | 11:58 |
| geser | wgrant: does it load for you when you aren't logged-in? | 11:59 |
| geser | I retried it after logging in and it works but not when I'm not logout again | 11:59 |
| wgrant | geser: Ahhh. | 11:59 |
| wgrant | Yes, that would be it. The cache has some odd behaviour for anonymous users. Could you file a bug, please? | 12:00 |
| Daviey | StevenK: bug 831073 | 12:01 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 831073 in jack-tools (Ubuntu Oneiric) "jack-tools version 0.0.2-7ubuntu1 failed to build in oneiric" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/831073 | 12:01 |
| Daviey | StevenK: it's like it's using a different pwd to what sbuild and pbuilder does. | 12:01 |
| Daviey | (note, this is multiple upstream tarball package - so my thought is that the buildd's are not handling this correctly) | 12:01 |
| wgrant | And the award for most useless named component orig tarballs goes to... | 12:03 |
| bigjools | StevenK: it's in Perl. You know Perl. Ergo ... | 12:03 |
| Daviey | heh | 12:03 |
| StevenK | That's like saying "There's a bug in the kernel. It's in C. You know C. Ergo ..." | 12:04 |
| bigjools | Perl - for masochists everywhere. | 12:04 |
| StevenK | Which is an utter fallacy | 12:04 |
| * bigjools wins this round of trolling | 12:04 | |
| StevenK | Just because I know Perl doesn't mean I want to spend two weeks stabbing myself with sbuild's particular idiocy | 12:04 |
| Daviey | StevenK: Hmm, the kernel comment is infact valid. Kernel 4.0 will be written in Go, yaknow. | 12:05 |
| bigjools | and on that happy note, I head to lunch | 12:05 |
| StevenK | Daviey: I was already holding daggers to hold sbuild back. Tell me does it hurt when I do this ... | 12:05 |
| Spads | StevenK: "Never admit to anyone that you know how to write sendmail rules or TROFF macros" -- Marshall "Kirk" McKusick | 12:06 |
| Daviey | :) | 12:06 |
| StevenK | Haha | 12:06 |
| StevenK | Spads: So we should add regexs and Perl to that list? | 12:06 |
| StevenK | They fall under the same line noise as sendmail rules. | 12:07 |
| Spads | StevenK: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1732348/regex-match-open-tags-except-xhtml-self-contained-tags/1732454#1732454 | 12:07 |
| StevenK | Bwahahahaa | 12:08 |
| Spads | Best Of The Web. | 12:09 |
| StevenK | Daviey: Did it only fail on amd64? | 12:12 |
| StevenK | Daviey: Perhaps it is wanting some file that is only built in an arch-indep target | 12:12 |
| geser | wgrant: bug 845544, do you need any other data? | 12:13 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 845544 in Launchpad itself "Inline publishing details on the source package page don't load when I'm not logged in" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/845544 | 12:13 |
| wgrant | geser: That's fine, thanks. | 12:13 |
| wgrant | Daviey: I wonder if you need to build-depend on automake. | 12:14 |
| wgrant | Daviey: I can reproduce not quite the same error, but a similar one, by removing automake -- you depend on automake1.7, but automake was providing aclocal here. | 12:14 |
| wgrant | And you see the build log complaining about aclocal being missing. | 12:15 |
| wgrant | Daviey: One thing you could try is building in the same chroot that LP uses. | 12:15 |
| wgrant | Daviey: You can see the URL at https://launchpad.net/api/devel/ubuntu/oneiric/i386 | 12:15 |
| Daviey | StevenK: no, failed for all | 12:41 |
| Daviey | wgrant: Yeah, will try that. | 12:42 |
| Daviey | thanks | 12:42 |
| jsjgruber | #ubuntu-sso | 15:31 |
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | ||
| === beuno is now known as beuno-lunch | ||
| === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch | ||
| === beuno-lunch is now known as beuno | ||
| === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara | ||
| === matsubara is now known as matsubara-afk | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| rodrigo | hi! I couldn't find I working way in the docs about how to add a tag to a bug report using a link, can someone help me with it? THANKS!! | 23:49 |
| rodrigo | something like +filebug?field.tag=doc | 23:50 |
| wgrant | rodrigo: field.tags=doc | 23:52 |
| rodrigo | wgrant, jojojo! I can't believe it... | 23:52 |
| rodrigo | wgrant, THANKS! | 23:53 |
| rodrigo | wgrant, and for the description field? | 23:54 |
| wgrant | rodrigo: It should be field.description, but it seems it's actually field.comment. | 23:55 |
| rodrigo | wgrant, THANKS A LOT! I coudn't believe that I was stuck because of a typo... | 23:56 |
| wgrant | Heh. | 23:57 |
| rodrigo | wgrant, thanks again!. | 23:57 |
| wgrant | np | 23:58 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
