[01:07] <seanmontana> hello
[01:08] <seanmontana> Anyway to know an update on Launchpad Bug #1010981
[01:08] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1010981 in linux "Computer does not power off when attempting to shut down by any route." [Medium,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1010981
[01:08] <seanmontana> or a workaround
[01:15] <TheLordOfTime> that bug is marked as incomplete
[01:15] <TheLordOfTime> they want the latest upstream kernel tested
[01:16] <seanmontana> whats that mean
[01:16] <TheLordOfTime> (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1010981/comments/23)
[01:16] <ubot2`> Ubuntu bug 1010981 in linux "Computer does not power off when attempting to shut down by any route." [Medium,Incomplete]
[01:17] <TheLordOfTime> basically that means the bug is incomplete, so they can't fix it yet.
[01:17] <TheLordOfTime> i think
[01:17]  * TheLordOfTime isnt on the kernel team
[01:18] <TheLordOfTime> see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/BugTriage/BugStates#Incomplete_Bugs for what they mean by "incomplete"
[01:18] <TheLordOfTime> if you have questions, you could post those questions on the bug
[01:18] <TheLordOfTime> but in its state i dont think the kernel team can diagnose the problem in its current state
[01:19] <seanmontana> hmm
[01:19] <seanmontana> maybe ill do that kernel upstream thing
[01:19] <seanmontana> i have no idea how though..
[01:19] <seanmontana> ill check it out
[01:20] <TheLordOfTime> they give you a link
[01:20] <TheLordOfTime> if you're unsure how to test, well...
[01:20] <TheLordOfTime> not sure that bug'll get fixed
[01:21] <TheLordOfTime> (although i can't confirm that bug anyways, with any kernel, and i'm running a Quantal kernel on Precise)
[01:22] <seanmontana> right cause you would have to have my computer model right
[01:27] <seanmontana> how do i know which mainline build is the most current
[01:28] <seanmontana> because i see v3.2.28-precise/ with timestamp 20-Aug-2012
[01:29] <seanmontana> and then i see v3.3.1-precise/ with timestamp 02-Apr-2012
[01:29] <seanmontana> which appears to be a higher version number but older date
[01:43] <seanmontana> how do i know which is the latest mainline build image to install
[01:43] <seanmontana> based upon version number alone?
[14:07] <penguin42> xnox: Bug 1041838 - I think the naming is the feature, but it's still a bug - the ubuntu-devel notes are only work arounds; the only case I see where it's not a bug is if he set it as eth0 in a preseed
[14:07] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1041838 in ubiquity "i386 netboot install ubuntu server: no wired network after install [incorrect name in interfaces file]" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1041838
[14:08] <xnox> penguin42: "set it as eth0 in a preseed" this must/should not be done any more.
[14:09] <penguin42> xnox: Right, so the question is did he use a preseed, if he didn't preseed then it should have got it right
[14:09] <penguin42> xnox: He doesn't say he preseeded
[14:10] <xnox> but he did use pxe boot, which sets options.
[14:13] <penguin42> xnox: right, so I think it's important to ask where his pxe config came from; and the interesting thing is that the install process worked fine, it was only what happened after that didn't - so the installer did get the biosdev but the installed result didn't which seems to be the opposite of what's being suggested
[14:38] <olmjo> folks, any help would be appreciated; I am working on triaging my first bug.
[14:39] <olmjo> turns out the first is, I think, a feature request. i need a bug-control member to change the "importance" to "wishlist", right?
[14:39] <penguin42> olmjo: Yes, but we're happy to make the changes for you
[14:40] <penguin42> olmjo: So just give the bug number  and say what you want it to set to and why
[14:40] <olmjo> great, thanks.
[14:43] <penguin42> does someone have an ARM install of Quantal that they can check a bug on?
[14:50] <olmjo> Bug #702905 should be changed to "Wishlist". The Ubuntu package depends on open-jdk, but the upstream project does not, so this isn't a feature request for upstream. The upstream project is at <http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rJava/index.html>.
[14:50] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 702905 in rjava "r-cran-rjava depends on openjdk-6-jre only" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/702905
[14:51]  * penguin42 looks
[14:54] <penguin42> olmjo: I don't think that's a wishlist; I mean if it's possible to use a variety of JRE's then it *should* be dependent on something like java6-runtime
[14:55] <olmjo> penguin42: Okay. Fair enough. I guess I reasoned that is how it would be classified because the Ubuntu package is explicit about that dependency. It just shouldn't be artificially restricted that way.
[14:57] <olmjo> I'll re-read some of the bug triaging doc. Thanks!
[14:57] <penguin42> olmjo: What I don't know is whether there is a reason that it's restricted to openjdk-6 - I'm guessing from the description it's a jni thing, and I wonder if those do move between jre's easily? I don't know enough Java foo
[15:00] <micahg> olmjo: that's invalid now
[15:00] <micahg> sun-java was dropped from the archive last year
[15:01] <micahg> err...this year
[15:01] <penguin42> micahg: Should probably still be fixed to depend on java-runtime ?
[15:02] <micahg> penguin42: you'll want to check the packaging in quantal for something like that
[15:02] <olmjo> michag: Ah, I see. I knew I haven't had sun-java for a while now, so that makes sense.
[15:02] <penguin42> micahg: Still says it's a depend on openjdk-6-jre on quantal
[15:03] <micahg> package hasn't been updated for java 7 or the new java packaging standards yet AIUI
[15:03] <penguin42> micahg: Yeh which is probably the right thing to ask for
[15:04] <penguin42> micahg: So back to a previous question; do you have a Quantal ARM board to hand?
[15:04] <micahg> no
[15:05]  * micahg disappears for a bit
[15:05] <penguin42> ok, thanks
[15:11] <olmjo> penguin42: can you clarify things for me? what is the right course of action?
[15:13] <penguin42> olmjo: I'm not sure - but that's ok you don't have to triage every bug; I think '(16:03:34) micahg: package hasn't been updated for java 7 or the new java packaging standards yet AIUI'  is the right comment here - the package really needs updating in various javay ways - but I don't know enough about Java to say that
[15:14] <olmjo> okay, great.
[15:14] <olmjo> thanks!
[18:05]  * penguin42 bug 235539 is fun
[18:05] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 235539 in acpi "Laptop boots at Midnight, by itself." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/235539
[18:32] <RoyK> penguin42: Achluophobian laptop? ;)
[18:32] <penguin42> RoyK: Thank you for the word of the day!
[18:35] <penguin42> RoyK: You've not got an ARM quantal install do you?
[18:35] <RoyK> only precise atm
[18:35] <penguin42> nod, not got any ARM stuff setup atm - I'm suspecting bug 501277 will still happen on ARM
[18:35] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 501277 in gdb "gdb "catch syscall" doesn't work, missing syscalls/amd64-linux.xml" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/501277