=== kees_ is now known as kees === pedro_ is now known as Guest31580 === pedro_ is now known as Guest28600 === pedro_ is now known as Guest89666 [10:51] Hi, I'm working on the following bug : https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dante/+bug/857598 [10:51] Ubuntu bug 857598 in dante (Ubuntu) "socksify fails to run" [Undecided,In progress] [10:52] I would need a task for precise as I will also propose a fix for precise as part of another bug I'm working on [10:54] I have also taken the liberty to switch it to In Progress as I've assigned myself to it [10:54] not sure if it was to proper thing to do [10:55] caribou, done and assigned to you [10:55] jibel: merci [10:55] caribou, if you're working on it in progress is the right status [10:56] jibel: that's what I thought [10:56] for reference https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Status === pedro_ is now known as Guest39639 [14:18] What should I do if I have a debdiff that fixes two separate bugs ? [14:18] attach it to both bugs ? === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === Jikan is now known as Jikai === Jikai is now known as Jikan === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [20:00] Hi good people, can someone check out bug 1200304 and get any private data removed so that it can be made public. [20:00] The request comes from the OP === pedro_ is now known as Guest17976 [20:14] op can make it public himself [20:15] and I think he can also read and remove his own data [20:15] ^ that [20:16] phillw: ^ [20:16] jtaylor: I'll ask that he does. [20:16] strangely I can't even see the bug [20:17] jtaylor: nor I which is suspicious [20:17] or suggests something broke [20:17] or maybe its one of the packages or projects bugcontrol doesn't have access to [20:17] not really. It all depends on how the bug was opened, and against what [20:17] ^ [20:17] * TheLordOfTime shrugs [20:18] anyway, phillw ^ we cannot see it [20:18] so the OP will have to remove the data, or wait until someone who can see it can get to it [20:18] yep [20:18] hmmmmmmmmmmm [20:18] * TheLordOfTime checks something [20:19] I've asked the OP to mark it as public, but I'm a little concerned that in doing so, it could reveal private information that should not be made public before having such data removed.... [20:19] phillw: he should go through the data and remove it himself [20:19] He is a tester, not a programmer! [20:19] hehe [20:20] phillw: it might, indeed. But since we cannot see it -- not even to know what is in there --, there is not much we can do. If you could find from the OP what he opened the bug against, we then could find who would have access [20:20] mhm [20:21] like, opened against upstream as opposed to an Ubuntu package, marked the bug as a security issue (which means only the security team can see it), etc [20:22] yep [20:23] I've copied this chat to the OP, not too sure which time zone he is on, so I will await a reply. Thanks for your help. [20:25] phillw: glad to help, even if we did not actually helped... [20:25] oh, bad tense. Ah well. It is Friday. [20:27] hggdh: you're excused :) [20:28] hopefully the grammer nazis are jumping off cliffs :P [20:28] phillw: i'm a grammar nazi usually [20:28] but i'm just as bad typing from a phone [20:28] :/ [20:35] TheLordOfTime: since it is Friday, you should have said "... excuset", or something like it. So that I would not feel alone, and all that :-) [20:35] :P [20:36] hggdh: autocorrect on the iOS is decent at doing its actual jonbn [20:36] job* [20:36] TheLordOfTime: THANK YOU! [20:36] * hggdh now has company [20:36] :P [20:37] * TheLordOfTime goes back to figuring out an FTBFS problem in non-Ubuntu software. [20:49] the bug is against lightdm [21:03] phillw: not lightdm(Ubuntu), but just lightdm, right? [21:03] hggdh: is it against "lightdm (Ubuntu)" or just the lightdm project [21:03] because if it's the second of those i don't think bugcontrol has access [21:03] hggdh: lightdm(Ubuntu) [21:04] then it was probably masked as a security bug [21:04] ehh whatever i was going to say is bleh [21:04] that's probably it then [21:04] cuz otherwise we would have access to it [21:04] private security i think needs sec team [21:04] security* [21:04] yes. They are the only ones that can see them [21:05] the screen shot is at http://imagebin.org/264322 [21:06] phillw: oh, OK, it is a crash. Only apport retracing has access to it right now [21:06] who are they? :) [21:06] phillw: others will only have access *after* initial apport processing [21:07] phillw: they who? [21:07] apport retracing [21:07] phillw: when a crash bug is opened, the bug is restricted -- the presence of a coredump is more than enough to make it restricted [21:08] So, what advice should I give to the OP? [21:08] so only an internal back-office process -- the apport retracing utility -- has access to the bug. When the retracing is done, the coredump is deleted, and the bug is accessible for some [21:09] phillw: tell him/her to please wait. The bug should NOT be made public right now [21:09] okies, again - thanks [21:09] phillw: after we have the retracing done, we can look at it, and see if it is good to be public [23:08] TheLordOfTime: could you have a read of a new section https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Overview#My_bug_is_marked_private to see if it is factually correct, thanks. [23:09] phillw: someone else can, I'm busy atm yelling at PayPal [23:09] okies! [23:10] phillw: have a moment for a quick PM? [23:10] Hi, can someone from bug-squad check on if https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Overview#My_bug_is_marked_private is factually correct, i [23:10] pleia2: always :)