[07:24] <Andy80> hi all. I've two different versions of QtSDK installed on my system. The last one I installed is the one I do NOT want visible on the Launcher. Every time I start the old QtCreator, I click on "Keep on Launcher", but if I exit and the click again on it, the NEW one is loaded instead. Where can I change this? Thanks.
[08:13] <sil2100> Trevinho: hi!
[08:13] <sil2100> Trevinho: did you have a look at that failing test
[08:14] <sil2100> Trevinho: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/automerge-bamf/71/console
[08:33] <sil2100> bilal: I looked at the MRQ for software center integration - looking rather nice, but we would probably need some automated tests for these
[08:34] <sil2100> bilal: as Didier said, software center integration usually breaks everything, so we need to be utterly sure that it's safe
[09:34] <greg> hi i have a basic question
[09:35] <greg> how can i make my ubuntu LTS 12 work with unity... its not an optio when im logging in
[09:35] <greg> and niether are Gnome or anything
[09:46] <sil2100> greg: what do you mean?
[12:35] <sil2100> Trevinho: ping
[12:41] <alkazar> pong?
[12:48] <sil2100> andyrock: hiii!
[12:57] <Trevinho> sil2100: hi, I'll look at the fail soon
[12:57] <Trevinho> sil2100: I got the mail but I was not at home
[12:57] <Trevinho> sil2100: checking soon
[12:58] <sil2100> Trevinho: thanks
[12:58] <andyrock> sil2100, hey
[12:58] <sil2100> Trevinho: I was actually building this branch on my quantal system and I didn't see the test failing
[12:58] <sil2100> Trevinho: but jenkins thinks otherwise
[12:59] <sil2100> andyrock: you know what I want to ask of you..? ;)
[12:59] <andyrock> sru something?
[12:59] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/994163 <- exactly, 5.0 MRQ pretty please with cherry-pick on top ;)
[13:00] <andyrock> sil2100, will ok
[13:00] <sil2100> andyrock: big thanks
[13:00] <andyrock> sil2100, big welcome
[13:17] <smoser> hi.
[13:18] <smoser> i upgraded to quantal yesterday. i use pentadactyl with firefox. pentadactyl released version has some issues with newer firefox so i'm using a nightly build from pentadactyl.
[13:19] <smoser> the menu bar is present in the UI, and normally its not (File, Edit, View, History...). in pentadactyl, you can toggle this by 'set guioptions' but that has no affect for me.
[13:20] <smoser> i'm wondering if it could be related to a change in how the menu-bar-in-panel-bar works rather than in firefox/pentadactyl
[13:54] <smoser> seb128? ^ sorry to be so ignorant as to not be able to diagnose the problem more than that.
[13:54] <smoser> (sorry to single you out also. i opened http://code.google.com/p/dactyl/issues/detail?id=883 which is possibly invalid if this is an ubuntu issue)
[13:55] <seb128> smoser, better to ask chrisccoulson, but firefox works so that seems an issue with pentadactyl, whatever that stuff does
[13:56] <smoser> seb128, thanks. as i said, this is all magic to me :) thanks for the redirect.
[14:31] <sil2100> Trevinho: did you have a moment to look at that failing test?
[14:59] <Trevinho> sil2100: checking....
[15:14] <Trevinho> sil2100: I can't get why it's failing... I've not changed the test at all
[15:14] <Trevinho> sil2100: also it's not the test itself to fail
[15:15] <Trevinho> (otherywise we would have logs for that)
[15:15] <Trevinho> sil2100: probably there are problems running it
[15:15] <Trevinho> sil2100: if it doesn't run over X or Xvfb can fail, but again I get no warnings for that (on the server)
[15:16] <Trevinho> seb128: are the bamf tests running under X or not?
[15:16] <seb128> Trevinho: not sure but I would assume under xvfb
[15:16] <Trevinho> in the meanwhile I'll try again... maybe it was only one issue
[15:17] <Trevinho> seb128: there's not one by default, I mean I must run it manually... right?
[15:17] <seb128> trevinho: what? xvfb? I would assume that whatever run the test run it for you, i.e make check
[15:18] <seb128> didrocks probably knows better
[15:18] <didrocks> right
[15:18] <sil2100> hm
[15:18] <didrocks> make check after a configuration with --headless-tests
[15:18] <Trevinho> seb128: currently the bamf's Makefile uses xvfb... exactly
[15:18] <didrocks> to run all the test, normally under xvfb                                                           │ Daekdroom
[15:19] <Daekdroom> Hm.
[15:20] <didrocks> Daekdroom: sorry, copy and pasting xvfb to not make a typo and middle click
[15:20] <didrocks> Daekdroom: seems it copied until the end of the line :)
[15:21] <Trevinho> didrocks: mhmhm... bamf used to listen to the --enable-headless-tests configure flag... has been that changed?
[15:22] <didrocks> Trevinho: it didn't AFAIK
[15:22] <didrocks> Trevinho: and that's what I'm running on the merger
[15:22] <didrocks> so the test seems to be flacky in headless env
[15:23] <Trevinho> didrocks: make check-headless when is ran?
[15:23] <Trevinho> didrocks: if I run make check on tty1, with --enable-headless-tests it works to me...
[15:23] <didrocks> Trevinho: it's make check-headless which is run
[15:23] <didrocks> Trevinho: right, but you are not in a chroot
[15:23] <didrocks> with a fake dbus
[15:24] <didrocks> (the one runned by dbus-test-runner)
[15:25] <Trevinho> didrocks: libbamf doesn't listen to make check-headless:
[15:25] <Trevinho> + make check-headless
[15:25] <Trevinho> make: *** No rule to make target `check-headless'.  Stop.
[15:25] <Trevinho> + make check
[15:25] <Trevinho> Making check in lib/libbamf
[15:25] <Trevinho> (from https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/automerge-bamf/71/console )
[15:26] <didrocks> Trevinho: if this target doesn't exist, the merger is using make check
[15:26] <Trevinho> didrocks: make check exsists, make check-headless doesnt'
[15:26] <didrocks> yep, so it runs make check
[15:30] <Trevinho> didrocks: yes... But I'm wondering, are them running on a different environment, or not (and it's up to me to setup a fake xserver?)
[15:31] <didrocks> Trevinho: the "only" differences is that it's running under a chroot, xfvb and dbus-test-runner are installed
[15:32] <Trevinho> didrocks: yes, but I mean... make check-headless and make check, would run in the same place, right?
[15:32] <didrocks> Trevinho: oh indeed
[15:32] <didrocks> no difference between them
[15:32] <didrocks> the code is stupid and simple
[15:33] <didrocks> make check-headless || make check
[15:33] <Trevinho> ok...
[15:33] <didrocks> so if the first one succeed -> fun, enjoy, stop
[15:33] <didrocks> if it fails || to the second one
[15:33] <didrocks> and return the status of the second :)
[15:33] <didrocks> no rocket science here, just… shell! :)
[15:34] <Trevinho> it would probably nice to get even a make xcheck to get the fake env on the builder reducing some makefile duplication between different projects... isn't it?
[15:34] <didrocks> Trevinho: yeah, that would be lovely :)
[15:34] <Trevinho> didrocks: ah, one thing... is G_MESSAGES_DEBUG set to a value there?
[15:35] <didrocks> Trevinho: hum, nothing done in particular no
[15:35] <Trevinho> didrocks: because if the problem would be the missing xserver, then the test should warn about it
[15:35] <Trevinho> while I get only an unknown error with no messages... :o
[15:36] <didrocks> Trevinho: yeah, I think sil2100 can log into the machine with me and we can have a look building with this
[15:36] <didrocks> if this can help you
[15:43] <Trevinho> didrocks: yes, thanks...
[15:43] <Trevinho> please sil2100 can you check that?
[15:43] <Trevinho> sil2100: it failed again... but I get no output here
[15:44] <Trevinho> I don't know what has been changed
[15:44] <Trevinho> few weeks ago it was passing with no problems
[15:44] <sil2100> Trevinho: it fails on your machine as well?
[15:44] <sil2100> Or do you mean the merger?
[15:45] <sil2100> It's indeed strange, since I remember running the test this morning on the new branch and all tests were successful
[15:46] <Trevinho> sil2100: I get no failures here
[15:47] <Trevinho> sil2100: both running it under x and under tty1 with headless...
[15:48] <sil2100> Really strange thing...
[16:24] <Trevinho> sil2100: any discovery so far?
[16:27] <sil2100> Trevinho: sadly, no... something's wrong in the merger probably?
[16:52] <Trevinho> sil2100: I don't know... I've retried and it failed again... is a file like test-bamf-results.xml generated locally (on the merger server?)
[17:27] <sil2100> Trevinho: hm, not sure now
[17:27] <sil2100> Trevinho: since we have to pack up for today
[17:27] <sil2100> But I'll look at it when I'm in the hotel
[17:27] <sil2100> Trevinho: if you find anything, drop me an e-mail
[17:27] <sil2100> Trevinho: big thanks!