=== TJSmith_ is now known as TJSmith === zyga-afk is now known as zyga === mapreri is now known as mapreri_ === mapreri_ is now known as mapreri [13:15] so, i was looking through "NEW" ubuntu bugs, and we have a significant number... some that are just *ancient* [13:17] hggdh: happen to be alive? [13:22] who in their right mind nominated this for "Ubuntu" directly four days ago, if its already "Fix Released" [13:22] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/738453 [13:22] Ubuntu bug 738453 in avant-window-navigator "[natty] taskmanager applet crashes on right click" [Medium,Fix released] [13:26] its an old bug too [13:26] * LoT goes to poke the LP people [13:28] LoT: You do get some random sets of changes in bugs and I can never figure it out, I've seen a few bugs which have just had loads of random changes, the best explanation is it's just new users not understanding, but I don't know [13:28] penguin42: i've undone their fails, but i'm starting to think we need some type of a restriction for bugs [13:29] PERSONALLY... [13:29] i believe that people should be required to sign the CoC in order to *edit* bugs "affects" [13:29] that way there's the requirements of a PGP key and a digital signature before they randomly modify bugs [13:29] my main concern is that this user is *literally* brand new. [13:30] Member since:2012-07-07 [13:30] LoT: Yeh I've seen it on a few, it'svery odd [13:30] this user only modified that one bug, too... [13:30] https://bugs.launchpad.net/~xerotonin#show_id=true&show_information_type=false&show_tag=false&show_reporter=false&show_targetname=true&show_assignee=false&show_date_last_updated=false&show_datecreated=false&show_importance=true&show_heat=true&show_milestone_name=false&show_status=true&batch_key=%5B%22-importance%22%2Cnull%2Ctrue%2C0%5D [13:30] BLEH EVIL LINK! [13:30] anyways [13:31] i did state in my comment that if they think it was *not* fixed, then rather than reassigning the bug to "Ubuntu", they should comment "This error showed up again" or "This bug showed up again in $version" [13:31] * LoT at least has the patience today to not rant at these people beyond that of typical LoT opinion0stating [13:32] LoT: I've sene it before, and I've wondered if it's on purpose, but I don't get it [13:33] penguin42: might be a bot [13:33] but i'm thinking its something i bring up on the bugsquad mailing list [13:33] this happens pretty oftenish [13:33] LoT: Yeh I did a while ago [13:33] and i dont like it [13:33] penguin42: i didnt see that, must've been before i joined [13:33] got the archive? [13:34] LoT: Let me see, it was in April, I was commenting on the changes to bug 804662 [13:34] Launchpad bug 804662 in jockey "jockey-gtk crashed with TypeError in _execute_child(): execv() arg 2 must contain only strings" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/804662 [13:34] LoT: https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-bugcontrol/msg03696.html [13:34] penguin42: yeah i joined at the very very end of april :P [13:35] penguin42: ah, i wasnt subscribed to bugcontrol then (wasnt a member) [13:35] explains why i didnt see it xD [13:36] but yeah, i think its both an issue of PEBKAC and spam [13:36] that' Enki" name is familiar, but i cant place it... [13:36] hey 4 letters being familiar.... [13:37] where do i know that from... [13:37] i know it from somewhere important... was it from when i opered another network...? [13:38] * LoT digs around in 5-year-old files [13:54] penguin42: its mildly annoying when stuff that shows "Fix Confirmed" actually shows up in the "New" list, and its old and stale :/ [13:55] i mean, there's this old bug in the 300ks and its still applicable for "oneiric", but apparently nobody fixed it [13:55] (originally reported in 9.04) [13:56] LoT: Yeh there are lots of old bugs; if it annoys you, fix it :-) [13:57] penguin42: if they're still applicable, i'm not touching them :P [13:57] but old "Fix Released" stuff... :p [13:58] that shouldnt be messed with and if it IS messed with, well... [13:58] *booM* [13:58] i'll be on it :P [13:58] (if/when i see it) [13:58] okay, now i'm more annoyed with the general userbase... :/ [13:58] LoT: hehe yeh, the most common reason fix released stuff gets fiddled with is that people find the same bug coming up again [13:58] because apparently people think that every failed config file they set up is a bug [13:58] LoT: Now now, can't get annoyed with them! [13:59] * LoT grabs the invalidation keys for the teams he's on [13:59] these "invalid" bugs are not bugs! [13:59] (they're on projects, which i manage, so... not bugcontrol or ubuntu) [13:59] penguin42: when you see twelve bugs that arent bugs on an upstream project, all within a minute of each other... [14:00] and they're random failed config files that the users wrote... [14:00] * LoT shrugs [14:00] i've never seen that much spam hit my inbox at once though [14:00] (and when i have, its only ever been when the Russians bombarded my email server, and the spam filters couldnt keep up [14:01] _ [14:01] BLEH, keyboard's on the fritz again [14:01] LoT: OK, so why are the users making so many config screwups and reporting them as bugs - are the error messages it creates not helpful enough? [14:01] penguin42: you mean like "$configargument is not valid within a $container section of the configuration"? [14:01] where $configargument is some random item [14:02] and $container is a block of config that relates to a specific part of the program [14:02] because that's the errors they're getting.. but the error even says it cant be used [14:02] and it also says refer to documentation [14:02] ah, not much you can do about that then :-) [14:02] nope [14:03] except mark the bugs as notbugs and then convert to questions, then say "Please refer to the documentation, as the error states." [14:03] and then they email me and are like "But I followed the docs..." [14:03] "Did you read the section that says "Valid only in"? [14:03] "Ohh.... no...?" [14:04] *facepalm* "Go read it" [14:04] (typical post-convert-to-question email chain) [14:05] LoT: I am here now :-) [14:06] hggdh: heh, was going to ask you for the link to the source for your bot's "Announce" function, but then i dug up something that works better [14:06] heh [14:06] hggdh: was in this channel instead of the -announce channel (irssi is evil that way) [14:09] * penguin42 goes to get a new audio lead - just being able to hear the left channel is annoying [14:09] oh god, this playlist came up again :/ [14:11] i dont like this playlist much, its great for when i'm playing first person shooters... [14:11] but that's because this playlist makes me a tad more evil (perfect for FPS games) [16:34] ah stereo [16:39] penguin42: enjoy it while it lasts [16:39] :P [16:43] LoT: With these leads probably not too long :-( === jdstrand_ is now known as jdstrand [18:46] Hello. I have reported bugs before using ubuntu-bug. However, how do I report a bug when it is about the installation itself? [18:48] PaddyLandau: Report it against the package ubiquity [18:49] PaddyLandau: How far does the installation get? [18:50] (and which install image are you using?) [18:55] I am installing 12.10 alpha. It is only a minor problem. [18:55] Cosmetic, not a show-stopper. [18:55] The image is the 64-bit standard desktop. [18:56] ok, cool, then I'd probably do it after installation, just do an ubuntu-bug ubiquity [18:56] Thank you. I'll do that. [18:56] np [19:58] hallo, can someone verify if bug 1027207 is a dup of bug 1012906 (private) for me ? thanks in advance [19:58] Launchpad bug 1027207 in ubiquity "Ubiquity 2.11.17 (oem-config) crash in console-setup" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1027207 === yofel_ is now known as yofel