[01:32] <Tsubaki> hello, I think I might have found a security issue
[01:34] <psusi> what was the bzr version of clean?
[01:34] <Tsubaki> ?
[01:34] <psusi> git clean == bzr what?
[01:34] <Tsubaki> I do not follow
[01:34] <psusi> clean the working directory of unknown files
[01:35] <Tsubaki> ok?
[01:35] <psusi> what was the bzr command for that?
[01:35] <psusi> oops, meant to ask that in motu, wrong channel
[01:35] <Tsubaki> no clue
[01:35] <Tsubaki> lol
[10:48] <Machinista> Hi, attempting first triage activity:  this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1079056 looks to be a significant feature request imo.  Opinions?
[10:48] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1079056 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "ubiquity does not detect Windows 8" [Undecided,New]
[10:49] <xnox> Machinista: it's a bug in os-prober and there are patches in debian to detect EFI systems.
[10:50] <Machinista> Ok, thanks.
[11:05] <Machinista> 1079056 would appear to be a duplicate of '#978028 os-prober fails to recognize Windows 8'
[15:20] <Machinista> Hi, if a bug is marked 'fix released' is this the end of the work-flow or is there some verification/close event that comes after this?
[15:28] <mitya57_> Machinista, verification is performed only for stable updates and they are marked fix released after that
[15:29] <TheLordOfTime> Machinista, "Fix Released" means Fix Released.  After its "released" that bug's "done" so to speak
[15:31] <Machinista> mitya57, TheLordOfTime thanks.  So a new bug opened for same issue (now fixed released) would be a regression rather than a duplicate?
[15:31] <TheLordOfTime> it could be
[15:31]  * TheLordOfTime rarely works with regressions, though
[15:32]  * TheLordOfTime should read up on "regressions" ":P
[15:33] <TheLordOfTime> Machinista, did that ever work previously?
[15:33] <TheLordOfTime> (still assuming LP Bug 1079056 is the topic)
[15:33] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1079056 in os-prober (Ubuntu) "ubiquity does not detect Windows 8" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1079056
[15:33] <Machinista> TheLordOfTime, yes, still on that topic.
[15:34] <TheLordOfTime> Machinista, did that ever work previously?
[15:34] <TheLordOfTime> after 978028 was fixed, of course.
[15:35] <Machinista> TheLordOfTime, I've seen a fix event, but no confirmation that it was actually fixed, just a comment after the fix that 12.04 also has this problem.
[15:35] <TheLordOfTime> if it was SRU'd then someone confirmed the fix...
[15:35] <xnox> considering that windows 8 was released on October 26 it has little chances of working =)))))
[15:36] <Machinista> And now also repported against 12.10.  So, was it ever fixed/working?  :)
[15:36] <TheLordOfTime> apparently for Oneiric, but...
[15:37] <Machinista> Anyway, as to triage.... should it be tagged as a regression do you think
[15:37] <TheLordOfTime> i'm trying to reach the stgraber, who marked it fixed released, to get background on it
[15:37] <Machinista> kk
[15:38] <TheLordOfTime> hiya stgraber
[15:38] <stgraber> hey
[15:39] <TheLordOfTime> so, Bug 1078056 was marked as a dupe of Bug 978028 apparently, which you handled
[15:39] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 978028 in os-prober (Ubuntu) "os-prober fails to recognize Windows 8" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/978028
[15:39] <TheLordOfTime> was the "fix Released" for 978028 ever verified, or was it assumed?
[15:39] <TheLordOfTime> (Precise was in dev i think at the time)
[15:39] <stgraber> it was verified with the consumer preview of win8
[15:39] <TheLordOfTime> but not been checked since win8's commercial release?
[15:40] <TheLordOfTime> because Machinista here is saying there's a regression since then
[15:40] <stgraber> correct. I don't have win8 so can't check (not that I'm really doing any installer work lately)
[15:41] <TheLordOfTime> ah, thanks, just trying to gather background :P  i'm assuming this is a regression, then, no clue which regression tag (or just 'regression') is needed.
[15:41]  * TheLordOfTime doesn't usually ahndle regressions :PP
[15:41] <TheLordOfTime> bleh stupid keyboard
[15:41] <TheLordOfTime> my keyboard should be labeled a regression... regression from those that work >.>
[15:42] <stgraber> well, what's the regression? win8 final not being detected isn't a regression as it quite likely never was
[15:42] <TheLordOfTime> LP Bug 1078056 has details
[15:42] <stgraber> bug 1078056
[15:42] <TheLordOfTime> but the bug bot ain't reporting it here because its already been called
[15:43] <TheLordOfTime> <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1079056 in os-prober (Ubuntu) "ubiquity does not detect Windows 8" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1079056
[15:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1079056 in os-prober (Ubuntu) "ubiquity does not detect Windows 8" [Undecided,New]
[15:43] <TheLordOfTime> oh so NOW you work
[15:43]  * TheLordOfTime kicks ubot2
[15:43] <xnox> Bug 1
[15:43] <xnox> ..
[15:43] <xnox> bug 1
[15:43] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1 in Ubuntu "Microsoft has a majority market share" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1
[15:43] <TheLordOfTime> so the bugbot is breaking now?
[15:43] <TheLordOfTime> HOW DARE IT
[15:44] <xnox> stgraber: was it verified in uefi or bios?
[15:44] <stgraber> right, so still not a regression, I don't believe os-prober ever detected win8 on that machine
[15:44] <stgraber> xnox: bios
[15:45] <stgraber> my guess is that os-prober simply doesn't support detecting Windows on UEFI (or at least win8 on uefi) or win8 changed something in the magic value for the final release
[15:45] <xnox> stgraber: so I don't believe we have support to os-probe other uefi installs....
[15:45] <xnox> there are patches about it on debian bts but I have not poked them.
[15:45] <stgraber> in either case, doesn't match the definition of regression which is "something that used to work with an earlier version of the package and stopped working in a later version"
[15:46] <TheLordOfTime> see, this is why release people should lurk here more :p
[15:46] <stgraber> xnox: I did a quick check and we're in sync with Debian on os-prober (+ a small delta) so if they implemented uefi code, it's not been released yet
[15:46] <TheLordOfTime> they know information on "regressions"
[15:46] <TheLordOfTime> i don't :P
[15:47]  * TheLordOfTime returns to trying to fix his boot partition
[15:48] <Machinista> Ok, interesting conversation.  Seems that 1079056 should be left in new state.
[15:49] <TheLordOfTime> stgraber, so this bug is already existing in Debian as a bug that should be fixed?
[15:52] <TheLordOfTime> if so it should be linked to the LP
[15:52] <stgraber> TheLordOfTime: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687921
[15:52] <ubot2> Debian bug 687921 in os-prober "Make os-prober to support efi loaders" [Normal,Open]
[15:53]  * TheLordOfTime subscribes
[15:57] <Machinista> Sounds liek a wishlist item then, not a bug. Someone want to do the honours?
[15:58] <TheLordOfTime> i could if LP wasnt timing out for me
[15:58]  * TheLordOfTime is getting network-side timeouts on his end
[16:08] <TheLordOfTime> stgraber, thanks for hopping over here to help :)
[16:10] <stgraber> np
[16:16] <Machinista> TheLordOfTime, stgraber and thanks to you both for helping me triage my 1st bug :)
[16:16] <Machinista> ..should've chosen an earier one/
[16:17] <TheLordOfTime> :P
[16:17] <TheLordOfTime> well, everyone starts somewhere :P
[16:17] <TheLordOfTime> me, i didn't even start out in bugs :p
[16:17] <TheLordOfTime> ended up there though
[16:17] <TheLordOfTime> :P
[16:18] <Machinista> Oh, it's the sort of place people...end up?  :p
[16:18] <TheLordOfTime> no, that's just me :p
[16:18] <TheLordOfTime> some people like working with bugs and start there
[16:19] <TheLordOfTime> i started out with support in general :P  then started working with the nginx team, started working in bugs, and now i'm working with bugs a ton :P
[16:20] <Machinista> That's great.  Someone needs to chap.
[16:23] <Machinista> TheLordOfTime out of interest, how does a report get transferred, tagged w/e as wishlist?
[16:24] <TheLordOfTime> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance  |  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Status
[16:24] <TheLordOfTime> Wishlist is an importance.
[16:24] <TheLordOfTime> Triaged goes with it.
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> Wishlist items, when bugcontrollers are aware of it, get marked as such (usually feature requests)
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> the Triaged status goes with them usually...
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> that's the triage guide
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> it explains most stuff
[16:25] <TheLordOfTime> there's special bugs though, they have slightly different rules
[16:26]  * TheLordOfTime never deals with those
[16:26] <Machinista> :)  thanks
[16:27] <TheLordOfTime> certain statuses can only be set by bugcontrol, and importance can only be set by bugcontrol, for bugs within Ubuntu's purview.  certain teams have bugcontrol though, i forget what they are...
[16:27]  * TheLordOfTime smells bacon
[16:27] <TheLordOfTime> now i'm hungry :/
[16:27]  * TheLordOfTime walks off
[18:17] <mspencer> What is the best mailing list to ask a question about correct way a bug fix should work? The bug is LP #657275
[18:17] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 657275 in apport (Ubuntu) "ubuntu-bug should save reports offline automatically rather than giving a cryptic error message" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/657275
[18:31] <hggdh> mspencer: you can use ubuntu-devel; but pitti already suggested the action, and he is one of the authors of apport/ubuntu-bug
[18:34] <mspencer> hggdh: Do you mean the text of the message? My question is about what should be done with the report if the user chooses to save it.
[18:36] <hggdh> mspencer: ah, OK. Then ubuntu-devel is a good place. Or you can go to the #ubuntu-devel channel and directly ask pitti (but not today, he has already left for the day, Europe TZ, I think UTC+1|2)
[18:38] <mspencer> What would be better?
[18:40] <hggdh> either, I think. Pinging him directly has the potential to get a faster answer (tomorrow). Emailing ubuntu-devel will get more views, OTOH. If you ping him, make sure to add context (like pitti: png re. bug 657275)
[18:40] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 657275 in apport (Ubuntu) "ubuntu-bug should save reports offline automatically rather than giving a cryptic error message" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/657275
[18:40] <hggdh> bah
[18:47] <mspencer> hggdh: Okay, thanks for your help!
[18:49] <hggdh> yw
[18:59] <mspencer> I've reported a bug that turned out to be a duplicate of a bug that has been fixed. Do I need to do anything to the bug I reported to close it or something?
[19:00] <hggdh> mspencer: if it is set as  a dup, no, you do not need to do anything else
[19:01] <hggdh> (duplicates are automagically disqualified)
[19:02] <mspencer> The bug is #1078895. Someone replied to me when I posted the bug and said it was a dup, but I don't think anything has been done to my bug report.
[19:03] <mspencer> LP #1078895
[19:03] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1078895 in openshot (Ubuntu) "Importing an image sequence messes up GUI" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1078895
[19:04] <hggdh> yes, this is not an official dup yet.
[19:05] <mspencer> Am I as the reporter responsible for marking this as a dup?
[19:05] <hggdh> mspencer: the other bug was fixed in a (to precise) future version, it seems
[19:06] <mspencer> It looks like this is a dup of LP #505578
[19:06] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 505578 in OpenShot Video Editor "Icons etc. disappearing" [Medium,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/505578
[19:06] <hggdh> if you can confirm it is a dup, you can go ahead and mark if as so
[19:07] <hggdh> mspencer: to find out if, and what, Ubuntu versions carry this corrected openshot you can use rmadison
[19:08] <hggdh> on it I seem that Quantal (and Raring) are running 1.4.3, so the fix should already be there
[19:08] <hggdh> mspencer: rmadison is in the devscripts package, if you are interested
[19:10] <mspencer> Why do I need to know what versions carry the corrected version? Just if I wanted to use the current version?
[19:11] <hggdh> mspencer: well, you might want to -- say -- run quantal, and check on it
[19:11] <hggdh> you are *not* required to, of course
[19:12] <mspencer> hggdh: So I should run quantal before I mark it as a duplicate?
[19:12] <mspencer> To make sure that my problem is fixed?
[19:15] <hggdh> mspencer: this would be ideal
[19:17] <mspencer> hggdh: thanks!
[19:18] <hggdh> mspencer: you are extremely welcome. Thank YOU for helping
[19:19] <mspencer> I have 12.10 installed in another partition and 13.04 in vm for bug fixing. Which should I test openshot in?
[19:20] <hggdh> 13.04 would be OK, it is running the same version as Quantal