=== glebihan_ is now known as glebihan
=== Guest91593 is now known as lemonsqueeze
lemonsqueezehiya, i'd like to request an SRU for bug #108545713:04
ubot2Launchpad bug 1085457 in xnee (Ubuntu) "cnee broken in lucid" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/108545713:04
lemonsqueezelooking for a bug supervisor to target the bug to lucid (as per wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates)13:04
lemonsqueezeam i in the right place ?13:04
penguin42it's a bit quiet today, if you don't get any response then you could also try #ubuntu-devel  but let me just look at that bug first13:06
lemonsqueezeoh yeah, sunday ...13:06
penguin42lemonsqueeze: Can you confirm whether the version in raring works?13:07
lemonsqueezeusing it at the moment13:07
lemonsqueeze3.13-1 that is13:07
penguin42ok, good13:08
penguin42lemonsqueeze: So then I guess the problem you might hit is that you don't have a fix so much as an upgrade to latest is the fix, you will probably get some push back from just jumping to a new version13:08
lemonsqueezehmm, what's the best way then ? initially i thought of asking for a backport but apparently it's not appropriate for bugs ...13:11
penguin42hmm interesting package - hadn't come across that before13:11
penguin42lemonsqueeze: Is this it always breaks or it just breaks with those options?13:12
lemonsqueezefrom what i can tell it's always broken.13:13
penguin42ok, and it's a different bug than bug 706794 ?13:13
ubot2Launchpad bug 706794 in xnee (Ubuntu) "gnee/pnee packages for Ubuntu lucid crash on record" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/70679413:13
lemonsqueezeyeah, it doesn't crash. it's just that it doesn't work at all13:14
penguin42do you know if the version in precise (3.11) works?13:16
penguin42lemonsqueeze: I've marked it as Fix Released - because the newer version works as you say; now that means it's then closer to the right state to ask for an sru I think13:18
lemonsqueezehaven't tried 3.11. Can give it a shot if necessary13:19
penguin42lemonsqueeze: It might be worth it; the interesting question I think is whether it needs a fix for Precise as well as lucid13:20
lemonsqueezeok, one moment ...13:22
penguin42lemonsqueeze: If you can find an actual fix in that went into xnee that fixed the problem then you have a much better chance of getting sru - i.e. if you can say 'we need *that* patch' then I think you've got a much better chance13:25
* penguin42 goes to get breakfast - back in 30mins or so13:28
lemonsqueezehave to reboot to test, will be back afterwards13:30
lemonsqueezeenjoy breakfast =)13:31
=== bilbo_ is now known as lemonsqueeze
lemonsqueezeok, cnee works under precise. so 3.11 ok as far as this bug is concerned13:51
penguin42ok, so add that as a comment to the bug; so in that case it's just Lucid you're after fixing14:03
penguin42lemonsqueeze: I've added a nominate for Lucid on it and added a comment; it might be worth checking with some others on -devel etc but I don't think it could be SRUd without finding a patch14:12
lemonsqueezeok, thanks dave.14:16
lemonsqueezei thought SRU in this case would be straightforward. it's probably not worth the time finding the exact patch as long as affected ppl can find the bug report ...14:21
penguin42lemonsqueeze: yeh I don't think generally the SRUs are 'this is the problem - here is the fix' because they are low risk; where as putitng in a new version people worry about if it will break anything else14:22
alo21hi. I am fixing this bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/util-linux/+bug/109552115:01
ubot2Launchpad bug 1095521 in util-linux (Ubuntu) "Manpage for mount list different options in same paragraph (keybits, nofail, iversion)" [Undecided,In progress]15:01
alo21Once I did, Do I propose a merge, or attach a patch to the bug?15:01
* TheLordOfTime glances in15:01
penguin42alo21: So is it an Ubuntu specific bug or general upstream?15:02
alo21penguin42, as I can see here, is a Ubuntu specific15:02
penguin42alo21: OK, it's worth checking though - if it was in upstream as well I'd send it upstream15:03
penguin42alo21: But if it's an ubuntu only then you have a choice of attaching a debdiff, or doing a bzr branch - bzr branches normally go in quicker in my experiences15:04
TheLordOfTimeis util-linux pulled from Debian at all?15:04
TheLordOfTimeif so, does the b ug exist in Debian?15:04
penguin42I would have thought so, so it's also worth checking that15:04
TheLordOfTime(if so, a patch should be sent to Debian too)15:04
TheLordOfTimebecause if the package is, at any point, pulled into Ubuntu from Debian, then its worth checking in Debian, even if there's an ubuntu delta (such that ubuntu-only changes happened after being synced from Debian)15:05
TheLordOfTimein which case you may want to just attach a patch, so that it can easily be sent to Debian (they don't use bzr nor merging :P)15:08
alo21penguin42, TheLordOfTime I checked in Debian, and seems that the bug is not reported here15:12
penguin42alo21: But is it actually in debian; i.e. is the package just  a copy of the debian package so the change should go back into debian anyway?15:13
alo21penguin42, yea... it comes from debian, and now is x.ubuntu415:14
alo21penguin42, What should I do? Check the bug in upstream, and if it is there too, fix it upstream?15:16
alo21Upstream I mean not debian15:17
penguin42alo21: Well it's always worth checking upstream to see if they already fixed it; if it affects upstream then you should send your patch upstream; I tend to also attach the patch to the ubuntu bug and also connect the upstream bug report to the ubuntu one15:17
alo21penguin42, hmm... well. I've never work upstream. So is it the upstream code: http://freecode.com/projects/util-linux15:19
penguin42hmm, I was going to check on http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/util-linux   but the 'homepage' link on there is broken15:22
penguin42alo21: Yes I think so15:23
TheLordOfTimei'd also suggest filing this in Debian.15:25
TheLordOfTimeif it gets fixed/accepted in Debian (and it likely will), then we can sync the fixed package to Raring assuming it doesn't break anything (some'll check with release and devel teams), and for older releases with the issue it may be SRU-able15:26
TheLordOfTimebut given the proximity to the april release i'm erring on the side of caution, probably more than i should be.15:26
TheLordOfTimebut also i should point this out:15:26
TheLordOfTimeDebian's under freeze.15:26
TheLordOfTimeso the bugfix in Debian may take a while.15:26
TheLordOfTimeand i mean a *while*15:27
* TheLordOfTime checks debian freeze status pretty much daily15:27
penguin42TheLordOfTime: Debian seems a bit weird on this; they've been stuck since July; some packagers seem to be ok about taking fixes into sid, some not15:28
TheLordOfTimepenguin42, usually i see the packages I monitor hit Experimental15:28
TheLordOfTime(usually znc, sometimes nginx)15:28
TheLordOfTimeso i usually don't ahve to worry much about sid/testing15:28
penguin42TheLordOfTime: I got a fix for horgand into sid and that bubbled back into Raring quickly; I was quite surprised15:28
TheLordOfTimeyou must've had a sync happen15:29
TheLordOfTimethey have... what... random sync times?15:29
TheLordOfTimeusually i have to request syncs (universe things)15:29
TheLordOfTimebut sometimes syncs pull in things :P15:29
penguin42TheLordOfTime: I can't tell from the bug 891939 what caused the sync15:30
ubot2Launchpad bug 891939 in horgand (Ubuntu) "horgand segfaults at startup (due to buffer overflow)" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/89193915:30
alo21TheLordOfTime, penguin42 I checked the code (upstream), and seems there is no line about 'keybits' related to my bug15:31
TheLordOfTimealo21, then its likely a debian-originated manpage bu15:31
TheLordOfTimealo21, or they fixed it upstream and it has yet to trickle into Debian15:31
* penguin42 looks15:32
alo21TheLordOfTime, It is so weird that some line are different/missed upstream15:32
penguin42alo21: Not necessarily, it might be a patch added by debian15:33
TheLordOfTimei see that a lot of time15:33
TheLordOfTimebleh, stupid keyboard15:33
penguin42alo21: RIght, if you look at the package you'll see that the util-linux_2.20.1-5.1ubuntu4.diff.gz  contains the patch that adds it15:34
penguin42(Oddly It doesn't seem to be cleanly done with a debian/patches directly)15:34
alo21penguin42, so.. is neither related to debain, but Ubuntu only. Right?15:36
penguin42alo21: Not sure - that's a diff between the upstream and what Ubuntu has15:37
alo21penguin42, I will download debian source and check15:38
TheLordOfTimesince we're not sure i'd suggest attaching the patch *and* proposing the bzr merge.15:38
TheLordOfTimeso if it has to be fixed in Debian, we can just upstream it15:39
TheLordOfTimeor if it has to be fixed upstream, we send the patch there too.15:39
alo21penguin42, debian doesn't have mount manpage15:40
TheLordOfTime... okay, that's weird...15:40
penguin42alo21: ?15:40
TheLordOfTimei found a discrepancy in the php5 package...15:41
alo21penguin42, sorry, It has15:41
* TheLordOfTime goes to ping the relevant channels about it15:41
penguin42TheLordOfTime: 'discrepancy' ?15:41
TheLordOfTimepenguin42, they dropped php5-mcrypt, php5-imap, and a couplle of others from the php5 source package, replaced with stuff in Universe15:41
TheLordOfTimebut the universe stuff (if they're versioned right) is using 5.4.6 series of code15:41
TheLordOfTimeand raring has 5.4.9 php515:42
TheLordOfTimediscrepancy, or breakage, or both?15:42
penguin42TheLordOfTime: Got split, then main one got updated and universe hasn't got there yet?15:42
TheLordOfTimethe changelog of the drop is raring-only15:43
alo21penguin42, is there a way to check manpage syntax from a file like file.1?15:43
TheLordOfTimethe changes prevent backporting due to breakage, i'll ask where i need to about it15:43
penguin42alo21: Not that I'm aware of15:43
penguin42alo21: I see that bug in my debian vm15:44
* TheLordOfTime needs to backport it for special-case use in a Precise server.15:44
TheLordOfTimehence PPAs  :P15:44
alo21penguin42, the bug is in Debian too15:47
alo21If I well checked15:47
TheLordOfTimealo21, i can upstream the bug, if you attach a patch to the ubuntu bug i'll forward that ot Debian too (make sure it applies cleanly to Debian)15:52
TheLordOfTimeor you can, if you want15:52
* TheLordOfTime doesn't care :P15:53
alo21ok. I will make a debdiff15:53
TheLordOfTimejust a patch would suffice15:53
TheLordOfTimenot sure Debian accepts debdiffs :P15:53
alo21TheLordOfTime, OK15:53
TheLordOfTime... assuming my system ever stops being SLOW15:55
penguin42TheLordOfTime: They take debdiffs15:55
TheLordOfTimepenguin42, oh good, then a debdiff'll suffice.15:55
TheLordOfTime... okay, apparently my internet needs slapping, so i can't upstream the bug right now15:55
* TheLordOfTime grabs the diagnostic tools and a hammer and goes to fix his network15:55
penguin42TheLordOfTime: diffs with the http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/  tags at the top seem to make packagers happy; they don't need to do much, it has the links to what it fixes and you get to put your name in it15:58
TheLordOfTimepenguin42, assuming you wrote the patch that is15:58
TheLordOfTimemy name ends up in the changelogs more than not because of upstream patches :P15:58
* TheLordOfTime pulls upstream patches and applies them in ubuntu, thereby getting his name in debian/changelog at least once15:59
TheLordOfTimemoreso for nginx, apparently *I* am the go-to guy for ubuntu bugfixing for nginx :/15:59
penguin42TheLordOfTime: Yeh which is a bit weird, if I put a patch in as a diff then I don't appear in changelog but I appear in the diff15:59
TheLordOfTimeand debian/changelog :P16:00
TheLordOfTimefor me, case in point: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/1.1.19-1ubuntu0.116:00
TheLordOfTimealso, for my much older commits to things, before they gave me correct changelog entries...16:01
TheLordOfTimehttps://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/0.7.65-1ubuntu2.3 and https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/1.0.5-1ubuntu0.116:01
* TheLordOfTime still got his name in the changelogs16:01
TheLordOfTimealbeit the address there is no longer active.16:01
alo21penguin42, TheLordOfTime have I to apport change in debian manpage, or ubuntu?16:26
alo21penguin42, bring*16:28
penguin42alo21: Pick one, doesn't really matter which if they both have the same problem; attach the fix to one, and then whichever way add the debian bug as also-affects on the Launchpad bug16:30
alo21penguin42, OK16:30
penguin42alo21: That wya the fix is visible to both of them - just say what you've done16:30
alo21penguin42, may be the lines are different16:31
penguin42alo21: If it's just a line number diff then the patch will probably apply cleanly anyway16:32
penguin42alo21: But like you can apply it to one and then just in the other one just point to the patch16:32
alo21penguin42, I read guides online. Is there a way to create a debdiff, without make a .dsc file?16:36
penguin42I think debuild can do it all for you - but I can't remember the details; but if it gets a bit messy a plain diff should do16:39
aranddebdiff only works on (u)debs or dsc files; are you thinking of dpkg-source --commit?16:40
alo21penguin42, I a build with the debuild, there will be changelog changes too in my debdiff16:43
alo21if I build* ...16:43
TheLordOfTimedebuild -S will generate a source package16:44
TheLordOfTimeyou can do a debdiff then16:44
TheLordOfTimethat's what I do for my bugs, although usually they're security bugs for stuff16:44
TheLordOfTimeso i have to follow a specific changelog format16:44
TheLordOfTimeso even if I don't use the generated source package, i do it for a debdiff16:44
TheLordOfTime... which explains all the cruft in my packaging directories16:45
alo21TheLordOfTime, I think is not good put changelog changes in a debdiff16:45
TheLordOfTimeyou and I can argue later on that16:46
TheLordOfTimesecurity team wants em, some don't16:46
TheLordOfTimeusually i include them anyways, if Debian says "Remove the changelog" then add an exclude rule when you run debdiff16:46
TheLordOfTimebut i usually include them anyways16:46
TheLordOfTimenow, explain to me why you think its not good to put changelogs into a debdiff16:46
TheLordOfTimeincluding in a diff, i'd understand16:46
TheLordOfTimebut a debdiff usually *has* to have a changelog entry somewhere16:47
penguin42lemonsqueeze: What do you expect 'gnee' to do?  It disappears (even on raring) when I hit record but still seems to be running in the background, is that the expected behaviour?16:47
alo21TheLordOfTime, and, as always, I have to upgrade the number too. Right?16:47
TheLordOfTimealo21,  for an ubuntu debdiff, yes, you should, as well as follow the number patterns16:47
TheLordOfTimelemme pull those up forst16:48
TheLordOfTimefirst *16:48
TheLordOfTimewhat's the version in Ubuntu now?16:49
TheLordOfTime(note for Debian i usually upload a patch and let the maintainers incorporate the patch :P)16:50
alo21x_ubuntu4, so I put 516:50
TheLordOfTimei think its 4.116:50
TheLordOfTimenot 516:50
TheLordOfTimejust standby16:51
TheLordOfTimei lost the link, i could poke thes ecurity team but i'd rather poke MOTU to fidn ubuntu versioning guides16:51
TheLordOfTimethe version numbering is all explained already in some wiki doc somewhere, i forgot where it was though16:52
TheLordOfTimeokay, i know this one's under the security team domain, but i follow its versioning numbering pretty much everywhere unless told otherwise (with nginx, znc, php5, etc. this versioning scheme seems to be the standard, even with non-security updates): https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging16:54
TheLordOfTimeso unless MOTU says otherwise, i'd follow that version scheme16:55
TheLordOfTimes/MOTU/the governing guidelines for that package or that pocket/16:55
TheLordOfTimejbicha, repeat what you said in -gnome here please.17:02
TheLordOfTimesince i wanted to ping you, but missed you joining here :P17:02
* TheLordOfTime could paste logs, but is currently fighting against his computer over the clipboard17:03
TheLordOfTimeah, there we go, here's the info: jbicha (who knows things) said that "the SRU team generally prefers using the same version numbering you'd use for security bugs"17:03
TheLordOfTimeassuming stable release then it falls under that.17:04
alo21TheLordOfTime, do you think is ok: http://ubuntuone.com/3dUKaoqDwWTi6i6Vf2xuua17:28
Teufelchencould anyone have a look, please: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/107980118:15
ubot2Launchpad bug 1079801 in mesa (Ubuntu) "mysterious application behaviour for the intel "sandy bridge" hardware" [Undecided,New]18:15
penguin42ooh a mysterious bug18:24
penguin42Teufelchen: Ah that one; I was the one who was asking for some information a few weeks back on it18:25
Teufelchenpenguin42, i tried to add some information. not sure if it is enough18:25
penguin42Teufelchen: The problem is it's not obvious that your problem is actually related to sandy bridge; you're seeing crashes - but how do you know it's related to it being a sandy bridge18:26
Teufelcheni dont know, its intuition. the updates on a different machine with a nvidia graphics chip worked fine yesterday, when compiz related stuff was updated18:27
penguin42Teufelchen: I'd run a memtest on that machine; get yourself an older memtest86 binary; the one on the Quantal image is very broken18:29
Teufelchensystem rescue cd?18:29
Teufelchenwhat if the memtest shows no errors?18:30
penguin42yeh, just get a rescue cd or any ubuntu install cd (older than Quantal) and run a memtest for a few hours18:30
penguin42if memtest doesn't show any errors then you really have a bug18:30
Teufelcheni will add the result to the bug report comments then18:30
Teufelchenplanning on running the tests tonight18:30
penguin42Teufelchen: I believe the bug in quantal memtest is it gives false errors in pass 7; so just watch out for that18:31
Teufelcheni have a burned CD of system rescue cd 3.1.118:32
Teufelchenthanks a lot of caring about this issue, penguin4218:32
penguin42Teufelchen: My dad runs with a sandybridge quantal system, we had a lot of problems getting it working, I ended up running on a daily kernel build, which is the other thing you could try - but that symptom was tht it just didn't boot when connected to certain monitors18:34
Teufelchenalso not acceptable18:34
Teufelchensomething is borked with these cheap and energy efficient chips, regarding support18:35
Teufelchenlike somebody would try to avoid that they become popular18:35
penguin42don't read a conspiracy into it just being screwed18:36
Teufelchenokay! :)18:36
=== ajmitch_ is now known as ajmitch
=== supercheetah is now known as Guest94637
notgaryCould someone please mark the Ubuntu task on this bug report as triaged and set it to a medium priority please? https://bugs.launchpad.net/rhythmbox/+bug/1038738. I think medium because it matches a number of the points mentioned here https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance23:30
ubot2Launchpad bug 1038738 in One Hundred Paper Cuts "Rhythmbox does not show the Library Location" [Medium,Triaged]23:30
xnoxnotgary: i believe it's expected behaviour.23:31
notgaryxnox, It is indeed designed to do that, but the design is bad the developer has even admitted so. If someone sends him a patch to improve it before he gets round to it, then he'll merge it in23:37
xnoxnotgary: sure, but that's upstream bug and a hard one =)23:38
notgaryxnox, is it really that hard? The multiple locations already have entries in gconf. I'd have thought it would be just a case of rejigging the interface for managing them.23:39
xnoxnotgary: by default we set two locations: ~/Music & the one for Ubuntu One Music store downloads. Ideally users should see & be able to change the first one, but not the second one.23:40
xnoxbecause then their music store won't work.23:40
xnoxbut there are other music stores as well... each with their own download locations...23:40
xnoxso there needs to be different "types" of music locations..... with ability to enable/disable (for music) and edit (for personal locations)23:41
xnoxfor music sotres that is.23:41
notgaryxnox, Ah, now I get it. I think I'll still have a go at it, but bearing all that in mind.23:47

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!