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