[00:05] how do we mark kernel bugs that trigger during installation so that the reporter doesn't get hastled to try latest mainline kernels etc? [00:13] Can somebody change the status of https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/jockey/+bug/804662 to "Confirmed" (and remove the assigned person)? [00:13] Launchpad bug 804662 in jockey "jockey-gtk crashed with TypeError in _execute_child(): execv() arg 2 must contain only strings" [Undecided,Fix released] [00:13] It was incorrectly marked as Fix Released by a newbie, and someone assigned it to himself randomly, and I can't change the values back. [00:14] * penguin42 looks [00:18] I can't figure out wth is going on with that bug - it seems like loads of people who are newish have changed the assignment on it or changed the state [00:19] Yeah... [00:20] It's really frustrating, as it's a major bug, and having it marked as Fix Released/Committed is essentially hiding it from the developers. [00:20] some bugs get to be a strange attractor [00:21] * Logan_ just applied for the the BugSquad. :-P [00:21] hggdh: I'm just wondering if it's some form of spam type thing - I can't see why there are so many changes of status, all from people who aren't members of any groups, and who have 0 karma and are recent joiners [00:21] Probably a language/knowledge barrier on Launchpad. [00:22] People get sent to the bug via apport, and then they assign it to themselves because they know no better. :-P [00:22] (Can't figure out the status changes, though.) [00:23] yeah [00:23] penguin42: perhaps we should mark it triaged [00:24] hggdh: Not sure - is it understood? [00:24] hggdh: I'm going to flag it to the bug-control list [00:24] I do not know, and I do not think so (TL;DR) [00:25] Want me to explain the bug? :-P [00:25] nah, let's keep it confirmed. I think the attractor is the video drive [00:25] Logan_: no ;-) I do not deal with video in any form, colour, or type [00:26] Okay. [00:26] How long does it take to be accepted to the BugSquad? [00:26] Just applied; I'd love to help out. [00:27] Logan_: takes about 2 minutes ;-) [00:27] Haha. [00:28] Logan_: welcome to the BugSquad, and all that. Please do not hesitate in asking questions here, we strive to help [00:28] welcome on board! [00:28] Thanks! [00:28] * Logan_ adds this channel to his favorites. [00:29] * hggdh goes monitor the TV for the destruction around [00:29] see you all tomorrow [00:30] yeh, and it's 1:30am here - so bed time! [00:30] I've flagged that bug to the bugcontrol list === Guest12256 is now known as dmogle === dmogle is now known as Guest23275 === Guest23275 is now known as dmogle === _thumper_ is now known as thumper [09:57] Question: bug#973161 Does anyone know which package it should be against? It is a problem with the left hand icon bar when in auto hide mode [10:17] Would anyone mind if I reopen bug 973206? It consistently crash on Precise when you attempt to run it. [10:17] Launchpad bug 973206 in gmorgan "gmorgan crashed with SIGSEGV in fclose()" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/973206 [10:19] Sounds reasonable, are you able to get the debug info with updated debug symols? [10:28] arand, surely to get that, you would need a non-stripped dbg version of gmorgan? [10:29] fwiw, I tried https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash, but I didn't find a dbgsym package for gmorgan.. [10:30] Ah, indeed, it doesn't create one :( [10:30] SO also report a bug on that ;) [10:31] But anyhow, if it does crash reproducibly, I'd still say to re-open the bug report. [10:31] arand, I like that, report a bug because there is not enough information to fix another bug! [10:32] and where would I file that one? To gmorgan as well "Please provide a debug package"? [10:32] arand, I opened a similar bug report, but for 64bit [10:32] hjd: Yeah. [10:34] Which package provides the icon bar on the left had side of unity? [10:50] arand: done. Reopened + filed bug 973282 about the debug package. [10:50] Launchpad bug 973282 in gmorgan "Please provide a debug package for gmorgan" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/973282 [12:03] hello, is someone there? [12:03] !971539 [12:03] Factoid '971539' not found [12:03] huh? [12:04] https://bugs.launchpad.net/firefox-extensions/+bug/971539 [12:04] Launchpad bug 971539 in firefox-extensions "ProfileManager" [Undecided,New] === ZarroBoogs is now known as Pici === Guest31547 is now known as tobin === ogra is now known as Guest67850 === ogra_ is now known as ogry === ogry is now known as ogra_ [13:15] good morning === io is now known as sw === emma is now known as em [16:47] I'm looking at bug 972620. I know I recently saw the same error message come through in a bug but I can't seem to find it. Has anyone seen a bug like this? [16:47] Launchpad bug 972620 in ubiquity "Vitual machine crashed while trying to install Ubuntu 11.10 32-bit on my Win 7 professional machine" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/972620 [16:47] Specifically the OSError: [Errno 17] === om26er_ is now known as om26er [17:46] is there a bug tag for bugs that are trivially repeatable? [17:48] penguin42: if it has a good set of steps to reproduce you can tag it "testcase" (I think) [17:49] penguin42: no difference between trivial (1. launch program X, 2. watch it crash and burn) and more complicated sequences of steps, if this is what you mean [17:49] ah testcase sounds good [17:49] penguin42: yes, once you have steps to reproduce all bugs are potentially trivially repeatable :) [17:50] roadmr: Well it's just some are very very simple and don't require any setup or anything like that, it's just 'run this command and it goes bang' [17:50] penguin42: I see, I'd still just use testcase for them [17:50] ko, thanks [17:50] ok even [17:53] * roadmr gets knocked out by penguin42 X( [17:53] heheh [17:53] :-) [18:05] bug 968753 is piling up a few dupes - can't remember seeing a crasher like that for ssh for a long time [18:05] Launchpad bug 968753 in openssh "ssh crashed with SIGSEGV" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/968753 [18:14] Hm, I wonder whether I should mark bug 926605 as a duplicate of bug 824708? They are triggered in completely different ways, but looks like they would have the same underlying cause. [18:14] Launchpad bug 926605 in aptitude "aptitude: failed to download the changlog of apt: Download queue destroyed." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/926605 [18:14] Launchpad bug 824708 in aptitude "Changelog download failed: Download queue destroyed." [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/824708 === bladernr_ is now known as bladernr_afk [18:44] Could someone please mark bug 688769 as Triaged/Low? Thanks. [18:44] Launchpad bug 688769 in synaptic "Cannot select previous search terms from the dropdown to repeat a search" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/688769 [18:50] hjd: s9iper1 looks [18:52] hjd: done [19:01] anyone have a Debian sid system around to try something on? [19:03] just a wheezy [19:03] yeh I wanted to try it on altest to see if it suffers from the same as the ubuntu build [19:19] s9iper1: thank you. [19:19] hjd: yw [19:41] penguin42: which package? [19:41] jtaylor: sipcalc - I've got to the bottom of the bug - see bug 973602 [19:41] Launchpad bug 973602 in sipcalc "sipcalc crashed with SIGABRT in __libc_message()" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/973602 [19:43] sid works [19:43] jtaylor: Thanks; I think it's probably only our builds with fortify that are failing [19:44] jtaylor: What package version is in sid? [19:44] 1.1.4-2.1 [19:44] though I only tried a chroot [19:44] not sure what that package does [19:44] nod [19:45] jtaylor: It does some ip address calculation by the looks of it, I'm sure I've heard of people using it [19:45] let me still check in a real sid [19:45] jtaylor: It looks like an easy fix, but the original author released a new version about 3 years ago with it fixed, it seems that would be the right thing to use (1.1.5) [19:45] also fails in precise chroot so probably sid not affected [19:46] jtaylor: Nod [19:46] jtaylor: I was triaging it on Precise [19:57] jtaylor: I'm not really sure what to do with that bug now, best thing is to say that it just needs the package updating [20:15] penguin42: given the small change I think its resonable to just update to the new upstream === gear4 is now known as zz_gear4 === yofel_ is now known as yofel === dmogle is now known as Guest62704 === bladernr_afk is now known as bladernr_ === dmogle is now known as Guest68416 === Guest68416 is now known as dmogle === greg_g is now known as greg-g