[03:40] <lacqui> Hi.  Trying to fix my first bug here (bug #885329).  I've followed the instructions on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToFix but I'm getting the following error:
[03:40] <lacqui> debian/rules:4: /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/debhelper.mk: No such file or directory
[03:41] <Guest29594> lacqui: Bug 885329 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/885329 is private
[05:37] <lacqui> can anyone review my bug fix please?
[10:44] <kanha> I forgot my root password which i set for recoverymode root shell is there any way to open ubuntu
[11:23] <kanha> I forget my recovery mode root password and also login password is there anyway to open ubuntu?
[14:33] <penguin42> what do we do with a bug for a Lucid version where the person is asking for a fix on Lucid?
[14:34] <ikt> sru
[14:34] <ikt> if there's a patch
[14:34] <penguin42> hmm it's got a reference to a patch; bug 835817
[14:35] <Guest29594> penguin42: Bug 835817 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/835817 is private
[14:35] <penguin42> it's not private
[14:36] <penguin42> gah, that bot needs oiling
[14:39] <penguin42> ikt: The guy has found a fix upstream (1 liner)
[14:52] <ikt> same deal I think
[14:52] <ikt> any update needs sru
[14:52] <ikt> I think there was a 10 line kernel patch that made the whole system faster
[14:53] <ikt> same sort of process though
[14:53] <penguin42> ikt: OK, but assuming I'm just triaging the bug how do I suggest to someone that it gets SRUd
[14:59] <elgaton> penguin42: Is it related to an application or to the kernel?
[14:59] <penguin42> elgaton: X
[15:00] <elgaton> penguin42: OK, the procedure is the one described in <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates>
[15:00] <elgaton> penguin42: Get the patch sponsored and committed in the development release first
[15:00] <elgaton> penguin42: then use the "Nominate for series" link
[15:01] <penguin42> elgaton: Thing is it doesn't need to be nominated for development because it's already fixed
[15:01] <elgaton> penguin42: What is the bug number?
[15:01] <penguin42> elgaton: Bug 835817
[15:01] <Guest29594> penguin42: Bug 835817 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/835817 is private
[15:05]  * elgaton is checking the Git commits for x
[15:10] <elgaton> penguin42: OK, it's fixed in Oneiric (just checked on a VM), so already fixed in the development version too. Just nominate for Ubunu 10.04.
[15:10] <elgaton> *Ubuntu
[15:10] <penguin42> hmm, done
[15:11] <elgaton> penguin42: Also update the bug description and follow the procedure in the link that I gave you earlier.
[15:12] <penguin42> elgaton: The interesting question is whether it fits the requirements for an SRU in terms of whether it's severe enough v regression potential
[15:16] <elgaton> penguin42: The most users can experience is a slight alteration (1 MHz) of the clock frequency - so there is almost no regression potential at first sight (of course, that will need to be tested), but it means also that the bug is not particularly severe.
[15:17] <penguin42> elgaton: Agreed; I guess it depends if you have a video system that happens to require the exact standard
[15:18] <elgaton> penguin42: Well, I think you should give it a try. (At most your fix gets rejected).
[15:21] <penguin42> elgaton: I'm not proposing producing the patched package; it's a pain for me to build and test - it's very easy though for an X dev to do if they already have it all set up
[15:25] <elgaton> penguin42: It is possible to you to generate just the debdiff? Maybe a personal PPA will help to check if the package build correctly without much intervention on your part
[15:26] <elgaton> penguin42: The sponsors team will then take care of the rest
[15:26] <penguin42> ok, might do that
[17:29] <elgaton> Could someone please set the importance of bug #886680 to "Medium" and the status to "Triaged"? Thanks!
[17:29]  * penguin42 looks
[17:30]  * yofel wonders where ubot4 got lost
[17:30] <yofel> jpds: ^
[17:31] <penguin42> elgaton: Done
[17:32] <elgaton> penguin42: Thanks
[18:05] <iceroot> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/869502 can someone mark this as critical?
[18:11] <puff> I need to report a bug;  I'm at the "check to see if it's been reported already", but I'm not sure what keywords are appropriate.  When I leave the machine alone and the screen saver kicks in, then I tap a key to bring up the screen unlock dialog, I get a white screen instead.
[18:12] <puff> Nothing seems to work;  typing the password blindly doesn't work.  Atemtping to shift to a console (e.g. ctrl-alt-f1) doesn't work.  However, closing the laptop so the machine goes into suspend, then opening again, does work.
[18:12] <yofel> iceroot: that's already high
[18:12] <yofel> why critical?
[18:14] <puff> I see only one bug with "screen saver" in oneiric, and it's not this bug:
[18:14] <puff> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+bugs?field.searchtext=screen+saver&orderby=-importance&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch=&field.has_n
[18:44] <iceroot> yofel: because the system cant be used and noone (instead of me) is really doing something on that
[18:44] <iceroot> and i dont have the skill to fix it mywself so i can only report it on LKML, maintainers and so on
[18:45] <iceroot> so maybe the keyword "critical" bring up some canocial-people to act on it
[18:46] <penguin42> that wifi has never been stable - it works and shutdsdown now - but stability is a different issue
[18:47] <iceroot> penguin42: but on ubuntu 10.04, 10.10 i never faced kernel-panics just some bad connections
[18:47] <iceroot> and i think kernel-panics are critical
[18:48] <penguin42> it's hard - every one of the oops messages on that bug is different
[18:48] <iceroot> penguin42: yes
[18:48] <iceroot> penguin42: but i feel lost with that issue. LKML is nit helping, launchpad is not helping
[18:48] <iceroot> if someone says to me do this and this, i will do it
[18:49] <penguin42> iceroot: Then that's the most you can do - you always have the option of reinstalling an earlier version
[18:49] <iceroot> of course or just using 2.6.38 on 11.10
[18:49] <iceroot> i know how to help me and i dont have a problem about using an older kernel or switch back
[18:50] <iceroot> but users came from windows or trying ubuntu for the first time, you cant say to them "roll back the system"
[18:50] <iceroot> and imo the most important part. at the moment noone from the kernel-dev team really cares about it
[18:51] <iceroot> i dont have problems with bugs in software, there can always be bugs
[18:51] <penguin42> iceroot: There are a lot of bugs and you can see there are people working on that one
[18:51] <iceroot> about a month
[18:52] <penguin42> iceroot: It's very difficult to fix something on hardware you don't have and which only occurs intermittently
[18:52] <iceroot> atm we dont know what is the issue, if it is rt2800pci, if it is the kernel itself, if it is the scsi system and so on
[18:52] <iceroot> i dont say its easy
[18:52] <iceroot> i just say that i dont really see support on that issue on a very common hardware (which the eeepc series is)
[18:53] <iceroot> also what is going on here
[18:53] <iceroot> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kwalletcli/+bug/802274
[18:53] <iceroot> i provided a patch, nothing happening
[18:53] <iceroot> one month for a security issue
[18:54] <yofel> I have a eeePC 1000H with an rt2860 chip, and no kernel panics since 3.0.0-13
[18:54] <iceroot> yofel: ever used 3.0.0-12?
[18:55] <yofel> that had kernel panics, but I never saw the full trace. And the bit of the trace I saw had nothing todo with networking (rather had ext4 symbols in it)
[18:55] <iceroot> yofel: i saw ext4 remounts in dmesg on the last panic
[18:56] <iceroot> yofel: how long are you testing 3.0.0-13?
[18:56] <penguin42> iceroot: As far as the kwalletcli one, I suggest if you're around in the week that you ask on #ubuntu-dev ; watch for when the title shows there is a 'patch pilot' in - and ask them *nicely* if they can take your patch from that bug
[18:57] <iceroot> patch pilot is a real person helping me on filling/fixing bugs?
[18:57] <penguin42> iceroot: Yes
[18:57] <yofel> installed since october 24th
[18:57] <penguin42> iceroot: A patch pilot is someone who can help get a patch in
[18:58] <iceroot> penguin42: thank you i will do so next week
[18:58] <penguin42> iceroot: But be nice to them - if you ask them nicely they can get it in and fixed quickly
[18:59] <penguin42> iceroot: The kernel bug is a really nasty one to fix; bugs that only fail rarely and with different results each time can be very hard to actually fix
[18:59] <iceroot> normally i am always nice. forgive me the last 5 minutes but i makes me not very happy that there is no new status on the kenrel-thing and i (as a normal user) have to post on LKML
[19:00] <iceroot> on dont even know how to post on LKML, what they want and so on
[19:00] <iceroot> that is what makes me not very happy but i will promise to be nice again :)
[19:00] <yofel> there's a debdiff on that bug and ubuntu-sponsors isn't subscribed -> not good
[19:01] <iceroot> yofel: but that should be a problem of launchpad?
[19:01] <yofel> nope, launchpad has no idea what a debdiff is, if anything it'll mark it as a patch
[19:02] <yofel> which isn't enough for the sponsors
[19:02] <iceroot> but how should i know that?
[19:02] <iceroot> there is ubuntu sec team and ubuntu review team on cc
[19:03] <iceroot> why should a normal user set a team (he dont know) as cc?
[19:03] <iceroot> and how should a normal user know that?
[19:03] <yofel> a user that fixes bugs should still read https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToFix
[19:04] <yofel> which has a different procedure, which would in the end still notify the sponsors
[19:04] <yofel> iceroot: also, kwalletcli is in universe, so ask in #ubuntu-motu before -devel
[19:04] <iceroot> yofel: much to complicated (i think)
[19:05] <iceroot> i provide a patch and someone who knows the needed steps should do the rest
[19:05] <iceroot> of course RTFM is one way
[19:05] <yofel> packaging isn't easy, and IMO bzr is rather easy to understand (we can talk about launchpad I guess....)
[19:05] <yofel> iceroot: there was/is the review team - problem is finding someone that does the work
[19:06] <iceroot> of course
[19:06] <penguin42> iceroot: The fact Leann Ogasawara was looking at your bug is good; although it's been quite for the last week, that may be because a lot of the Ubuntu devs have been travelling to a conference
[19:06] <penguin42> (sorry, net dropped)
[19:06] <iceroot> penguin42: sure, no problem
[19:06] <yofel> hm, I'm tired today
[19:06] <yofel> iceroot: again about kwalletcli
[19:07] <yofel> that needs to follow the SRU procedure
[19:07] <yofel> !sru
[19:07] <iceroot> penguin42: but i hope you unterstand my situation too. i am willing to help making ubuntu better but when there is no progress...
[19:07] <yofel> ah right, no bot -.-
[19:07] <yofel> Stable Release Update information is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[19:08] <iceroot> yofel: that patch is only a security-patch, no new features no major release
[19:08] <iceroot> yofel: so in my opinion, i provided a security-patch, so the sec-review team should do the rest. nothing more to do for me
[19:09] <yofel> well, yeah - I'm not on the security team, so I don't know how they work
[19:09] <iceroot> thats how i understand to provide a security-patch (doesnt matter what kind of repository)
[19:09] <iceroot> but they told me because its universe its a community based thing
[19:09] <iceroot> because of that i provided a debdiff instead of a patch
[19:10] <iceroot> but my point is, why i have to join this channel and ask for help (thank you btw for your help). why is not someone on the cc: list doing the job?
[19:11] <iceroot> that makes it not easy for normal users to provided patched and it does not make fun if noone cares what you are doing on launchpad
[19:11] <iceroot> s/patched/patches
[19:18] <yofel> iceroot: that you'll have to ask them, bug and patch handling isn't easy with the amount of bugs we have on launchpad
[19:19] <iceroot> yofel: i never said its easy
[19:19] <iceroot> yofel: but i am sure there are ways to make it easier
[19:20] <iceroot> yofel: and normally its working good, i made good experiences with launchpad and ubuntu-patching but some things are not working very well (imo)
[19:21] <iceroot> ubuntu-bug foobar e.g. is a very good thing. makes it very easy
[19:22] <iceroot> also the documentation is good but sometimes there are things were i thing noone really cares and you have it do to on your own (but you dont have the skills, time or now how is the correct person for that)
[19:23] <iceroot> s/how/who
[19:25] <iceroot> i think its late and i am tired. please dont understand my postings as a flamewar of being rude with you/ubuntu. i know we all do our best.
[19:26] <Christoffer> Is there any channel on IRC for unity development?
[19:29] <yofel> Christoffer: #ayatana
[19:29] <Christoffer> yofel: Thank you
[19:33]  * hggdh wonder about more links to documentation. It really seems we do not have them in the right place(s)
[19:34]  * hggdh goes booting -- taking the plunge to precise
[22:04] <elgaton> Hi everyone, is it possible to open a bug already marked as "Fix Released" because it is still present in the latest release?
[22:06] <yofel> rather file a new bug, and add a tag for the release it happens on, and the regression-release tag
[22:07] <elgaton> yofel: Thanks - one more question: how do I link it to the old report? Is a comment enough?
[22:07] <yofel> sure, just mention the old bug in the new one
[22:08] <elgaton> yofel: Thanks
[22:20] <elgaton> OK, could someone set the status of bug #877629 to Triaged and its importance to High? Thanks!