[00:03] out of interest: what is the decision process behind upgrading the included packages? === zz_bigbash is now known as bigbash === bigbash is now known as zz_bigbash [05:23] How do I find bugs specific to a certain programming language or toolkit (i.e: Qt, GTK, VTK)? [07:28] if you are talking about bugs in the compiler/code generator itself, look for them; otherwise... you have to know the packages... === Hurtz_ is now known as Hurtz === bulldog98_ is now known as bulldog98 === yofel_ is now known as yofel [14:54] Morning. I would like to contribute, but am mainly a Windows programmer. I have made the full jump to Ubuntu now, and would like to know where to start with bugfixes. Should I just grab a small bug and take a run at it? [14:58] jtokarchuk: what type of languages do you program? [14:58] C, asm, python, java [14:58] ok, so pretty much everything [14:58] essentially =] [14:59] jtokarchuk: So pick a bug, but then what you really need to do is look 'upstream' at where Ubuntu gets it from to see if they already fixed it [15:00] jtokarchuk: Most (but not all) Ubuntu packages come from debian packages, and they in turn come from whoever originally did the program; some of the work with deubgging in ubuntu is searching upstream to see if it's already fixed [15:01] Alright, I have read over the materials online quite a bit as well, but there was one unclear position: Do I need to be running the bleeding edge alpha? or are there plenty to fix in 11.10 [15:02] jtokarchuk: Well the thing is if you fix stuff in 11.10, unless it's a really important bug it won't get an update out there; however depending what you're fixing, if it's in an application say then you could just build the upstream application and work directly on that and contribute that straight back upstream [15:03] jtokarchuk: If it's something ubuntu specific, say the installer, unity or the like it's probably best to work on bleeding edge - maybe in a VM [15:03] Alright, so would testdrive be a usable solution for that? I had read about that. [15:04] jtokarchuk: Yeh that works, although what I do is I have a VM set up with quite a lot of RAM and disk and cpus configured so I can do builds and big stuff in the VM [15:05] jtokarchuk: But I'd say the 1st thing is choose the type of thing you're interested in debugging, because depending on the app it can take quite a while to learn the innards of the way it goes together and to find the bug [15:05] that works too, so just download a developer build and away I go [15:05] nod [15:06] jtokarchuk: The time scales of what bugs are important when varies as well; so with Precise at the moment going into alpha then it's all about getting fixes in for stuff broken in Alpha [15:07] Makes sense. [15:07] jtokarchuk: Some projects work mostly upstream though; like KDE stuff for example they seem to like to work on the main KDE sources and they have their own way of doing things [15:10] jtokarchuk: that is a good way to get started, you can find small bugs on harvest.ubuntu.com [15:10] Excellent. I am quite excited to get started. Have to run though, thank you for the ood info [15:10] wow that message took 10 min to get through :O [15:11] good [15:11] stupid flaky connection [15:13] jtaylor: Your censor wet for a rest break [15:13] n [15:13] ^^ [15:25] does someone know how to intentionally freeze the kernel during boot? I'm getting so many errors from 3.2.0 in precise that I can't read them [15:25] and "doesn't boot" isn't much of a bug report [15:32] you can put a delay between each message [15:33] yofel: Try boot_delay=100 - that will put 0.1s between each line of output from the kernel itself [15:34] thanks, I'll try that === bladernr_ is now known as bladernr_afk === Elbrus_reconnect is now known as Elbrus [16:34] is the fact I can't install liborc-0.4-0:i386 without uninstalling a load of 64bit stuff a bug in liborc itself or in something else? [17:18] penguin42: maybe something to do with it not being multiarched yet? [17:21] Ampelbein: That's the conclusion that Yofel suggested in +1, so I filed bug 899650 on it [17:22] Launchpad bug 899650 in ubuntu "liborc-0.4-0 not allowing multiarch install (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/899650 [17:22] penguin42: oh, sorry, didn't see the discussion in +1. [17:22] np [17:24] penguin42: I changed the affected package to "orc" (the source for liborc-0.4-0) [17:24] oh ok, I thought lp did that automagicall [17:24] y [17:25] I think it only works with apport filed bugs. And there is a QA-bot script running that tries to guess packages. [17:26] bah, lp is sulking for me anyway at the moment [17:56] Ampelbein: Oh gah - now I understand your comment; I thought I'd clicked the Report Bug from within the right package [21:29] yellow [21:29] green [21:31] who said blue? [21:37] no, it was cyan