[00:01] that's sort of what I expected, I'm just wondering if it'll ever happen given the # of bugs triaged to higher priorities. [00:01] garyseven: A medium priority one with a responsive reporter who can easily test it, is in some ways easier to deal with than a critical one without any prospect of figuring it out [00:04] garyseven: Given that it already seems fixed somewhere upstream, if it turns out to be possible to isolate the fix then there is a reasonable chance of it being fixed; that's a much easier case than say a bug which hasn't been fixed and actually needs someone to go and figure it out [00:07] if it existed upstream in the first place, that is. [00:07] anyway, ta, i gtg. happy xmas. === yofel_ is now known as yofel [12:18] 12.10 installer.. amd phenom 2 955, 8GB ram.. system has windows 7 on it, and a 64gb ext4 partition [12:18] installer crashes [12:18] trying to collect more useful info [12:19] i select english.. then it goes to a screen about installing the bootloader.. and says ubiquity has crashed.. tries to auto report it, and doesn't appear to do so [12:35] ok so ubiquity has crashed.. but i still don't really know why [12:35] File "/usr/lib/ubiquity/plugins/ubi-partman.py", line 1238, in on_partition_list_new_activate [13:08] ahh.. if you have a raidset defined, but not actually in use === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [20:01] i'm curious if folks think an SRU for pithos is appropriate: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pithos/+bug/1093865 [20:01] Launchpad bug 1093865 in pithos (Ubuntu) "pithos needs to be updated in precise" [Undecided,New] [20:01] it seems completely broken, so should either be removed or updated. [20:02] so it's now dead in the water? [20:03] pandora changed their API, so the old version fails to log in. [20:03] the version in quantal works fine, and rebuilding it for precise works fine. [20:04] or rather, rebuilding the newer verison on precise, works fine [20:04] vagrantc: Sounds reasonable given it's just a backport - although it is a universe - perhaps ask in MOTU to what they think? [20:05] I would think an SRU is in order if it's cherry pickable [20:06] penguin42: #ubuntu-motu? [20:06] it's not cherry-pickable, in the sense that individual patches would fix the issue. [20:06] it's a trivial rebuild backport, though. [20:07] vagrantc, i don't think backports are done for bugfixes usually... [20:07] at least according to what micahg's told me. [20:07] idk, I'd have to see if the whole thing is SRUable or not [20:07] but it's not actually a bug fix - it's catching up with an external API that changed under it's feet [20:07] well, if it's not fixable through SRU, that's fine [20:07] the package in precise is useless, so it should either be backported or removed. [20:08] micahg, is it possible to cherry-pick-remove a package from a given release? [20:08] well, that still potential meets SRU criteria [20:08] (unrelated to vagrantc's question) [20:08] remove from one, but not from others, basically. [20:08] theLordOfTime: this needs more discussion, I'm not actually here right now :) [20:08] so you're a holographic representation of micahg. [20:08] * TheLordOfTime preps the EMP :P: === JanC_ is now known as JanC [20:09] yeah, i know, randomness, but sometimes a brief jump into the random is refreshing now and then. [20:09] well, back to fixing stuff in nginx :P [20:30] thanks for your help, folks. [20:31] * vagrantc waves