[00:19] <kubotu> ::workspace-bugs:: [1242479] Device notifier always shows a removable device of 0 Bytes @ https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1242479 (by moray33)
[01:21] <kubotu> ::workspace-bugs:: [1242479] Device notifier always shows a removable device of 0 Bytes @ https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1242479 (by moray33)
[06:52] <jussi> Quick reminder, still a few T-shirts left! https://holvi.com/shop/Kubuntu/ 
[07:14] <lordievader> Good morning.
[07:33] <jussi> hrm, ddi the uppdate to 13.10, now I have a "hidden" menu in chromium
[07:34] <jussi> strange stuff
[10:10] <soee> good morning
[10:21] <yossarianuk> hi - there is a bug in the kubuntu 13.10 iso that prevents it installing on UEFI systems
[10:21] <yossarianuk> (not secure boot related)
[10:21] <yossarianuk> and its effecting mutiple users - the kubuntu Google plus 'ask and help' page is full of people not being able to run Kubuntu 13.10 with UEFI...
[10:22] <yossarianuk> the solution is to copy /boot/efi/EFI/kubuntu ->  /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu
[10:22] <yossarianuk> i,e Ubuntu is fine  - it is a Kubuntu specific issue. 
[10:22] <yossarianuk> bug report here - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1242417
[10:24] <xnox> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1063399 looks interesting
[10:25] <yossarianuk> at present people with no linux knowledge cannot install Kubuntu 13.10 on UEFI systems.... The bug fix would require a rebuild of the .iso also....
[10:41] <apachelogger> how I hate hybrid systems -.-
[10:41] <davmor2> apachelogger: nvidia?
[10:42] <apachelogger> no, kubuntu + some other thing
[10:42] <davmor2> apachelogger: ah I hear hybrid systems and instantly think gfx nowadays :)
[10:44] <apachelogger> how does one even debug bug 1241540
[10:44] <apachelogger> :@
[10:52] <apachelogger> yossarianuk: iff that issue had been reported in the 6 months prior to release of 13.10 then yes: "To fix this surely the 13.10 .iso will have to be rebuilt?"
[10:53] <yossarianuk> apachelogger: So that means anyone with no technical experience of Linux just cannot run kubuntu 13.10 if they have UEFI....
[10:53] <yossarianuk> that isn't good - surely the policy or remaking an .iso should change......
[10:54] <yossarianuk> i.e Kubuntu cannot be used by newbies (if they have UEFI...)
[10:55] <apachelogger> there could be 13.10.1 if anything
[10:56] <apachelogger> anyway, that's ubuntu-release business
[10:56] <apachelogger> and considering we do not know what causes the problem there is no point in discussing ISOs
[10:56] <yossarianuk> cool - I hope there is - otherwise i'll be telling my non techie friends to wait 6 months before trying Liunx (during which time they wil probably be using Windows 8...)
[10:56] <yossarianuk> apachelogger: It is efi/grub related and only effecting Kubuntu
[10:57] <yossarianuk> (it may effect xubuntu I guess..)
[10:57] <apachelogger> no
[10:57] <apachelogger> I know the cause
[10:57] <apachelogger> I do not know the reason
[10:57] <yossarianuk> the fix is to copy the kubuntu fold on the EFI partition to the name ubuntu
[10:57] <yossarianuk> *folder*
[10:57] <apachelogger> that is not a fix
[10:57] <shadeslayer> ^^
[10:57] <yossarianuk> well it is in the sense that the OS will then boot.
[10:58] <shadeslayer> that's a workaround then
[10:58] <yossarianuk> ye
[10:58] <yossarianuk> yes
[10:58] <yossarianuk> I always referenced it as a 'fix'....
[10:59] <shadeslayer> well, the only way to fix it is to find out why it can't pick up /boot/efi/EFI/kubuntu and fix that part?
[10:59] <yossarianuk> if you read you google plus page (ask & help) you'll see there are about 5 different people with same issue....
[11:00] <apachelogger> then I guess 5 different people should have reported this before release
[11:00] <yossarianuk> I know that it refers to the 'GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR' in /etc/default/grub
[11:01] <yossarianuk> some poeple did here http://www.kubuntuforums.net/showthread.php?63589-13-10-64Bit-Beta1-UEFI-GRUB-Not-Working-After-Install
[11:01] <yossarianuk> exactrly the same issue.
[11:01] <yossarianuk> looks like they didn;t actually do a bug report...
[11:02] <apachelogger> which is why I am grumpy
[11:03] <yossarianuk> I'm grumpy because its Monday.
[11:03] <apachelogger> that too
[11:04] <apachelogger> yossarianuk: are you on an efi system right now?
[11:04] <apachelogger> if so please paste the output of `grep -ri ubuntu /boot`
[11:04] <yossarianuk> apachelogger: not right now - i'm @ work (non UEFI)
[11:04] <apachelogger> ok
[11:04] <yossarianuk> (and im on 13.04 @ work..)
[11:05] <yossarianuk> will be tonight
[11:05] <yossarianuk> (home desktop = uefi.)
[11:07] <yossarianuk> if you want I can do this @ home and send the info somewhere...
[11:07] <yossarianuk> (p.s i'm not trolling.... I just want Kubuntu to work..
[11:15] <shadeslayer> likewise
[11:15] <shadeslayer> apachelogger is just pissy today
[11:15] <shadeslayer> yay
[11:15] <shadeslayer> tahr is open
[11:16] <lordievader> shadeslayer: And it is stable (for now) ;)
[11:16] <shadeslayer> ^_^
[11:24] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: no
[11:24] <apachelogger> I just don't appreciate hellfire drama after release
[11:25]  * shadeslayer hugs apachelogger
[11:25] <yossarianuk> apachelogger: to be honest is the installer can't install the OS that is reason for drama?
[11:25] <shadeslayer> uhm what, the installer worked just fine on the ISO
[11:25] <apachelogger> yeah
[11:26] <shadeslayer> if you're talking about remastersys, I don't think we care about that
[11:26] <shadeslayer> because it's unsupported
[11:26] <yossarianuk> i mean - if you try to install on UEFI you cannot boot the system
[11:26] <yossarianuk> without manual invervention
[11:27] <yossarianuk> (i'd say that is fairly dramatic.)
[11:27] <shadeslayer> and that could have been bought to our attention before release so that we could fix it
[11:27] <shadeslayer> we can't do anything about 13.10 ISO's now
[11:27] <shadeslayer> except maybe make a 13.10.1
[11:27] <shadeslayer> as apachelogger already explained
[11:27] <yossarianuk> that policy sucks a bit... That means newbies with UEFI cannot install 13.10 
[11:28] <apachelogger> no
[11:28] <apachelogger> the thing is
[11:28] <apachelogger> while 13.10 is the latest and greatest for you it is not for me
[11:28] <apachelogger> because I have my todo firmly set towards 14.04
[11:28] <shadeslayer> ^^
[11:28] <apachelogger> so every minute I get to spend on 13.10 *is* reducing the amount of development time I can spend on 14.04
[11:29] <yossarianuk> so what do you advise non techincal users to do?
[11:29] <apachelogger> report bugs before relase
[11:29] <yossarianuk> The solutions I can see are - wait 6 months, Install Ubuntu 13.10 (which is fine) or another Os.
[11:29] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: do you have EFI?
[11:29] <shadeslayer> no
[11:29] <yossarianuk> in an ideal world that would have happened.
[11:30] <apachelogger> meh, waiting for download then
[11:30] <yofel> did someone try the EFI checkbox in virtualbox?
[11:30] <yossarianuk> but it hasn;t - which is why the policy or remaking the iso should change.
[11:30] <apachelogger> it's not the policy
[11:30] <yossarianuk> otherwise its a 6 month wait for newbies
[11:30] <apachelogger> it's developer time
[11:30] <yossarianuk> and kubuntu is designed for all users...
[11:30] <shadeslayer> I have this stupid mixed implementation of UEFI and EFI from Apple
[11:31] <apachelogger> x developers have x*y amount of minutes to work on stuff
[11:31] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: and that is different?
[11:32] <shadeslayer> correct
[11:32] <apachelogger> silly apple
[11:32] <shadeslayer> it implements some things from the UEFI spec and some from the EFI spec
[11:33] <shadeslayer> frankenEFI
[11:33] <shadeslayer> whatever pleased the firmware monkeys at Apple :)
[11:33] <lordievader> yossarianuk: Why don't you join the Testers team so you can test the UEFI side of the iso's?
[11:34] <yossarianuk> is there a way I can target my bug report for the kubuntu distribution ? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1242417
[11:34] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: ^^
[11:34]  * apachelogger thinks he found the cause
[11:35] <shadeslayer> yossarianuk: just tag it with 'kubuntu' ?
[11:35] <yossarianuk> thanks
[11:35] <yossarianuk> lordievader: That is something I would like to do (test release..) - at the min I have a 6th month old Son so free time is limited....
[11:35] <yossarianuk> very limited....
[11:35] <lordievader> yossarianuk: Free time for everyone here is limited...
[11:36] <yossarianuk> I know that. Babies really do make an impact though..
[11:36] <yossarianuk> he likes pressing the keyboard though and I think he like wobbly windows...
[11:36] <yossarianuk> (he laughed..)
[11:37] <shadeslayer> heh
[11:37] <yossarianuk> I would be happy to also build the latest Nvidia driver (I have a PPA already) if that could ever been included in the distro...
[11:38] <yossarianuk> I showed him an Archlinux  install and he was sick
[11:38] <apachelogger> I somehow broke my zsh -.-
[11:39] <yossarianuk> (I dont; use X-Swat as it contains various other packages...)
[11:40] <yossarianuk> That's another policy I hope Kubuntu will change when Ubuntu go fully Mir - i.e they will include the latest Nvidia driver... I find it mad ubuntu(and others) include an out of date Nvidia driver with known bugs in (fixed in later versions) in the name of 'stability'.
[11:41] <yossarianuk> (this is obviously a very separate issue...)
[11:43] <yofel> we use the exact same nvidia packages as ubuntu (for technical reasons). You could talk to the folks in #ubuntu-x about helping with updating
[11:44] <yossarianuk> yofel: I know you do now. And I understand why - what I was saying is when Ubuntu stop using Xorg and go to Mir Kubuntu could have its own version (I would be happy to help maintain it...)
[11:44] <yossarianuk> (would be a good 'selling point' - latest stable nvidia driver....)
[11:45] <yofel> why would have our own version? It would talk to Mir over EGL - same as to wayland
[11:45] <yossarianuk> Ah yes when EGL support comes out...
[11:45] <yossarianuk> (i saw latest beta had it..)
[11:58] <jussi> Riddell: shadeslayer ScottK valorie yofel do we want to order some shirts for the attendees at the bug day ? (paid for by the KC) 
[11:58] <jussi> They are 14€ per shirt
[12:03] <yossarianuk> Does that money from the shirt go to kubuntu devs ?
[12:07] <smartboyhw> !find /usr/share/dbus-1/services/indicator-sound.service
[12:08] <apachelogger> I am too stupid to vritualize uefi
[12:33] <jussi> yossarianuk: the 14€ is cost price. Any money raised from the sales goes back into the kubuntu council funds, so I guess you could say that the money goes to kubuntu development
[12:33] <jussi> (they are being sold on holvi for 25€ including postage)
[12:35] <BluesKaj> 'Morning folks
[13:00] <yossarianuk> thanks jussi: will likely order one...
[13:01] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: btw efi boot works here
[13:01] <shadeslayer> on my macbook with the weird bootloader
[13:02] <yossarianuk> wil in the 40 mins I have been away from my desktop at lest one other person reported UEFI not working in the #kubuntu room..
[13:03] <yossarianuk> " Harbort: At least when installing in EFI mode,  it creates EFI/kubuntu folder but somehow, it is still configured to go look for EFI\ubuntu "
[13:04] <yossarianuk>  There are different versons of UEFI - i.e 2.3, 2.4, etc - could it just be certain versions (perhaps?_
[13:08] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: so, what's the exact problem that causes efi to not work?
[13:11] <shadeslayer> oh hmm, I didn't try installing
[13:11] <BluesKaj> not looking forward to installing Kubuntu on a new laptop , that efi thing isn't gonna be much fun for me
[13:14] <apachelogger> well
[13:14] <apachelogger> good news
[13:14] <yossarianuk> yey !
[13:14] <yossarianuk> (is there bad news too..)
[13:14] <apachelogger> I just found out that my supremely geeky laptop supports uefi, and even secureboot
[13:14] <BluesKaj> what was wrong with the old BIOS anyway ? oris this a deliberate difficulty setup by MS and mfgrs to keep linux out of these machines ?
[13:15] <yossarianuk> BluesKaj: no that's secure boot
[13:15] <yossarianuk> UEFI is an itel thing isn't it ?
[13:15] <yossarianuk> *intel*
[13:15] <tsimpson> it's a cross-body standard
[13:17] <BluesKaj> oh that, yossarianuk , i hope once I buy the laptop there will be an easier method to install linux on them
[13:17] <apachelogger> EFI is an intel thing
[13:17] <apachelogger> BluesKaj: BIOS is rubbish that's why they came up with (U)EFI
[13:17] <BluesKaj> ok ,but is amd fllowing suit ?
[13:17] <apachelogger> all sorts of pointless limitations
[13:17] <yossarianuk> GPT (which is seperate to EFI is awesome however)...
[13:18] <yossarianuk> BluesKaj: Aside from this issue UEFI is easy to setup now on most linux distros.
[13:18] <yossarianuk> either have a blank disk (with GPT table) or manually create an EFI partition...
[13:19] <yossarianuk> (non UEFI was easier however...)
[13:19] <BluesKaj> took me 15 yrs to understand and navigate the BIOS , now I have to start all over again :)
[13:19] <yossarianuk> AMD machines also work fine with UEFI I believe 
[13:19] <yossarianuk> BluesKaj: thats progress.......
[13:20] <apachelogger> now usb creator gets stuck
[13:21] <apachelogger> I swear to god, mondays one should simply not work
[13:21] <yossarianuk> I'd vote for that
[13:21] <BluesKaj> yossarianuk. it's not progress if the system is more difficult than before 
[13:21] <apachelogger> that's nonesense
 AMD machines also work fine with UEFI I believe 
[13:21] <shadeslayer> lol
[13:22] <shadeslayer> I have a AMD/ATI card and I had to jump through hoops to get it to work
[13:22] <shadeslayer> fglrx still doesn't work btw
[13:22] <yossarianuk> I am meaning a AMD based desktop/server
[13:22] <yossarianuk> not the GPU...
[13:22] <apachelogger> ^ that's because of AMD not because of UEFI
[13:23] <BluesKaj> think I'll look for a laptop with intel cpu and nvidia graphics , if that's possible
[13:23] <shadeslayer> so, how do we differentiate between fglrx and fglrx-updates in the new driver manager
[13:27] <yossarianuk> apachelogger: I have had random cases of the usb startup-disk-creator getting stuck - I normally end dd'ing the usb drive then reformatting it.
[13:27] <apachelogger> it's just being slow
[13:27] <yossarianuk> (if that is the same app..)
[13:27] <apachelogger> bug of the day: if you select an ISO in usb-creator it's add to the model but not selected
[13:28] <yossarianuk> I think this is relevant http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2I84-A9duY
[13:32] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: fwiw I can integrate with muon using dbus
[13:32] <shadeslayer> or
[13:32] <shadeslayer> maybe not
[13:32] <shadeslayer> hmm
[13:32] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: fwiw I can throw keyboards at you
[13:33] <shadeslayer> no you can't
[13:33] <apachelogger> try me
[13:33] <shadeslayer> you're still to far away
[13:33] <apachelogger> where's me mice
[13:33] <apachelogger> halp
[13:34] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: why would you want to throw mice at me
[13:34] <apachelogger> the mice are for me
[13:34] <shadeslayer> okay
[13:34] <apachelogger> apparently I use magic to get the touchpad on my portable computing device to work
[13:34] <shadeslayer> then why do you want to throw keyboards
[13:34] <apachelogger> alas, no working touchy when installing
[13:35] <shadeslayer> I thought muon had a packagekit dbus interface
[13:35] <shadeslayer> alas not
[14:00] <shadeslayer> fun, there is no muon API to install packages
[14:00] <shadeslayer> actually
[14:00] <shadeslayer> there's no muon API at all
[14:01] <apachelogger> muon is a framework ontop of libqapt
[14:01] <apachelogger> *application framework
[14:02] <shadeslayer> true enough, so does that mean I get to write my own UI ontop of that
[14:02] <shadeslayer> that = libqapt
[14:05] <debfx> probably, unless you call the qapt-batch binary
[14:07] <shadeslayer> hmm
[14:07] <shadeslayer> hm
[14:08] <shadeslayer> could do that I suppose
[14:09] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: you have a UI.....
[14:09] <apachelogger> what you need to do is wire that UI to however installation is supposed to happen
[14:09] <apachelogger> UI -> wiring -> libqapt
[14:10] <shadeslayer> qapt-batch seems nice
[14:10] <shadeslayer> will probably use that
[14:11]  * apachelogger can imagine the window piling already
[14:11] <apachelogger> it will be as glorious as kubuntu-debug-installer
[14:14] <shadeslayer> :D
[14:21] <apachelogger> install fail
[14:21] <apachelogger> making EFI from scratch is no fun
[14:35] <Riddell> jussi: yep I think we want plenty at the beastie squishing for all the kubuntu people but also others who go there
[14:46] <Riddell> http://toscalix.blogspot.de/2013/10/a-champion-instead-of-leader.html "The fact that Kubuntu is the number one distro among KDE developers" thanks toscalix_ :)
[14:48] <apachelogger> sweet baby jesus the uefi stuff is broken
[14:48] <apachelogger> Riddell: didn't you have a secureboot device?
[14:49] <Riddell> apachelogger: yeah, and it doesn't work too well
[14:49] <apachelogger> not at all is more like it :P
[14:49] <Harbort> apachelogger: isn't the problem a naming one?
[14:49] <Riddell> last I looked at it this laptop contained specific bugs in its firmware which ment it wasn't much use :(
[14:49] <apachelogger> I installed ubuntu, then I installed kubuntu now it always boots  ubuntu xD
[14:49] <apachelogger> Riddell: ah
[14:50] <apachelogger> Harbort: I'll argue that a kubuntu installation installing a kubuntu efi image is the correct thing
[14:50] <Riddell> cjwatson was going to add something to kubuntu which the ubuntu unity images have but I'm not sure what it was or if he did it
[14:50] <apachelogger> why it does not work is another thing xD
[14:50] <Harbort> apachelogger: I agree, the naming problem is in: why then is EFI trying to boot ubuntu?
[14:50] <apachelogger> Riddell: shim I reckon
[14:51] <apachelogger> which was applied to the efi folder ... thing is I am currently testing without secureboot and it doesn't even work as expected
[14:51] <Harbort> apachelogger: at the start, the prefix grub has is (hg1,gtp1)/efi/ubuntu where it should be (hg1,gtp1)/efi/kubuntu
[14:51] <apachelogger> where do you see that?
[14:52] <Harbort> in grub itself
[14:52] <apachelogger> that is... I am not even using grub
[14:52] <Harbort> ah ...
[14:52] <yossarianuk> In previous releases there was an issue with installing ubuntu+kubuntu in UEFI mode - but that was fixed in 13.04 - as the EFI directory changed from the name 'ubuntu' to 'kubuntu'
[14:52] <apachelogger> it does not getting into the actual efi image via the firmware
[14:52] <Harbort> but I expect the issue is still in which folder the EFI is configured to go look 
[14:52] <apachelogger> no
[14:52] <yossarianuk> previously to that to fix It I just added the word kubuntu in the grub_distrubutor line in /etc/default/grub
[14:52] <apachelogger> I suspect the problem is in the image itself
[14:53] <apachelogger> because what the firmware does is basically ls /boot/efi/EFI/
[14:53] <apachelogger> then you can boot into the invidual images in there
[14:53] <apachelogger> which is why from a firmware boot perspective you have ubuntu and kubuntu since 13.04
[14:53] <Harbort> then why is it booting in /boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu even though it's called kubuntu?
[14:54] <apachelogger> dunno
[14:54] <apachelogger> rather opaque it is
[14:54] <Harbort> indeed
[14:54] <Harbort> pb is: I have very little idea on how EFI actually works
[14:54] <apachelogger> options are a) kubuntu fails, and it boots ubuntu, b) kubuntu image has bogus reference to EFI/ubuntu which is why it boots that
[14:54] <apachelogger> anyway
[14:54] <apachelogger> installing kubuntu and erasing ubuntu
[14:54] <apachelogger> lt's see what happens
[14:56] <apachelogger> and actually I think it is failure option b) or a combination of and a and b in that a is caused by bogus references
[14:59] <Harbort> BTW, I see that the folders in /boot/efi reflect also the options I see in /boot/efi/EFI (i.e. I have a 'ubuntu' and a 'Microsoft')
[14:59] <Harbort> could it mean anything?
[15:01] <kubotu> ::workspace-bugs:: [1242729] unjustified package conflict between kde-window-manager and kde-style-bespin @ https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1242729 (by jbell.52)
[15:01] <apachelogger> Oo
[15:01] <Harbort> mmhh ... if that helps, /EFI/ubuntu appears in grubx64.efi
[15:01] <apachelogger> yeah
[15:02] <apachelogger> I am reasonable certain the image builder is at fault
[15:02] <apachelogger> because it explicitly references EFI/ubuntu
[15:02] <Harbort> and how are these images produces?
[15:02] <toscalix_> Riddell: is a fact and it is in a great extend thank to you and your colleagues
[15:03] <toscalix_> the old guys are opensuse but the guys now in charge and the newcommers.....mostly kubuntu
[15:03] <toscalix_> no question about it, I think
[15:06] <apachelogger> Harbort: at package build time it seems.... which makes things somewhat complicated
[15:06] <Harbort> apachelogger: indeed ... so it might be in the package build scripts!
[15:09] <Harbort> apachelogger: turns out, the files have been generated (god knows how) and the package just download them from the ubuntu servers ...
[15:14] <apachelogger> Harbort: hm?
[15:14] <Harbort> apachelogger: if you get the source of grub-efi-amd64-signed (package responsible foe grubx64.efi file)
[15:15] <Harbort> apachelogger: then you'll see that it is actually downloading the file from the package repository, not generating it
[15:17] <apachelogger> Harbort: the images are built by grub2, not grub2-efi
[15:18] <Harbort> $ dpkg -S /usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/grubx64.efi.signed            Mon 21 17:18
[15:18] <Harbort> grub-efi-amd64-signed: /usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/grubx64.efi.signed
[15:18] <Harbort> which is why I think it's built buy grub-efi
[15:20] <apachelogger> right
[15:20] <apachelogger> so the image builder is at fault
[15:20] <Harbort> I imagine so
[15:20] <apachelogger> if I build an image with EFI/kubuntu it works
[15:20] <Harbort> but what is the image builder?
[15:24] <Harbort> apachelogger: I am talking to the guys in #ubuntu-devel to get information
[15:34] <shadeslayer> anyone want to give me their thoughts on lp:~rohangarg/+junk/driver-manager-kde
[15:34] <shadeslayer> pushed some more awesome stuff now
[15:36] <shadeslayer> you'll still need to edit the hardcoded place for the ui file I think
[15:37] <apachelogger> are you sure you want to ask for thoughts while I am around?
[15:38] <shadeslayer> and gone
[15:38] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: sure, though I still need to figure out how to add some more descriptive text to each radio box
[15:38] <apachelogger>   localesDir="/usr/share/locale"
[15:38] <apachelogger> :O
[15:38] <apachelogger> eh
[15:38] <apachelogger> dafuq
[15:38] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: make a kapplication
[15:39] <shadeslayer> what
[15:39] <shadeslayer> @ localesDir?
[15:39] <apachelogger> dat shit you are pulling with translations
[15:39] <shadeslayer> oh
[15:39] <apachelogger> is contained in kdelibs
[15:39] <apachelogger> so by using kapplication you don't need to pull no nothing but simply add the right catalogs
[15:39] <shadeslayer> that be from software-properties-gtk
[15:39] <shadeslayer> oic
[15:39] <apachelogger> unless you python string
[15:39] <apachelogger> oh wait what
[15:39] <shadeslayer> but yeah, should probably fix that
[15:39] <apachelogger> ah
[15:39] <apachelogger> the tooltip stuff is spooky
[15:40] <shadeslayer> I know :)
[15:40] <apachelogger> and probably not i18n'd
[15:40] <shadeslayer> again, I know
[15:40] <shadeslayer> go on though
[15:40] <apachelogger> really though, slap a giant comment above the tooltip stuff, that needs changing
[15:40] <apachelogger> alas, I do not know changing to what, but that thing there is just bad
[15:41] <apachelogger> probably one big pile of text rather than many tiny lines
[15:41] <apachelogger> -.- python is so fugly
[15:41] <apachelogger> device_name = '<h3>' + hardwareDict['model'] + '</h3>'
[15:41] <apachelogger> dat bad
[15:41] <apachelogger> somewhere in kdelibs is also a way to get a QFont for titles or some such business
[15:42] <shadeslayer> done
[15:42] <apachelogger> from a reading perspective I'd say that getting rid of the pyqt modules would be handy
[15:42] <apachelogger> i.e. no QtGui.
[15:42] <shadeslayer> oh?
[15:43] <shadeslayer> okay will do that
[15:43] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: why is <h3> bad? because user might have modified titles?
[15:43] <apachelogger> code design is flawed btw
[15:43] <shadeslayer> *title sizes
[15:44] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: because h3 is no metric in terms of the kde platform
[15:44] <shadeslayer> okay
[15:44] <apachelogger> we have fonts, small fonts and title fonts
[15:44] <apachelogger> any other font sizing does not exist
[15:44] <apachelogger> anyway, as for the code design
[15:44] <apachelogger> you should make all of this async
[15:45] <apachelogger> right now apt cache loading is blocking showing the UI
[15:45] <apachelogger> bad thing
[15:45] <apachelogger> also loading the models is blocking
[15:46] <apachelogger> basically you should just have Mainwindow w; w.show() and inside the __init__ you should have only creating and connecting of the GUI objects, not actual population
[15:46] <apachelogger> and a singleshot qtimer for example that calls a function that then opens the apt cache and loads the models etc.
[15:47] <apachelogger> self.ui.buttonBox.clicked.connect(self.install_drivers)
[15:47] <apachelogger> a qbuttonbox has an accept and cancel signal btw
[15:47] <apachelogger> so you can have two slots
[15:48] <apachelogger> instead of having to pull stuff like if self.ui.buttonBox.buttonRole(clickedButton) == QtGui.QDialogButtonBox.ApplyRole:
[15:48] <shadeslayer> but would that apply to 'Apply'
[15:48] <shadeslayer> I didn't see a signal for 'Apply'
[15:49] <shadeslayer> and IIRC the accept signal didn't work
[15:49] <shadeslayer> though my memory is fuzzy
[15:49] <apachelogger> accepted and rejected are the signal names btw
[15:49] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: it works if you use it right
[15:50] <apachelogger> ah
[15:50] <apachelogger> maybe you need to use Ok instead of Apply
[15:50] <shadeslayer> but OK seems a bit weird
[15:50] <shadeslayer> yeah I was right
[15:50] <shadeslayer> accepted() doesn't work
[15:51] <apachelogger> accept is riggered by Ok and Yes
[15:51] <shadeslayer> OK doesn't work here
[15:51] <shadeslayer> waut
[15:51] <shadeslayer> yeo
[15:52] <apachelogger> you could use kde buttons you know :P
[15:52] <shadeslayer> xD
[15:52] <shadeslayer> okay, will change to KDE buttons
[15:52] <apachelogger> or make it a KCM
[15:52] <apachelogger> then you also get it for free
[15:53] <apachelogger> anyway ... http://api.kde.org/4.x-api/kdelibs-apidocs/kdeui/html/classKDialogButtonBox.html gives more control
[15:53] <shadeslayer> well yeah, I want to make it a KCM at some point
[15:53] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: can you point me to documentation about Python KDE KCM
[15:53] <shadeslayer> *KCM'sd
[15:53] <shadeslayer> I couldm
[15:54] <apachelogger> no
[15:54] <shadeslayer> I couldn't find any
[15:54] <shadeslayer> :(
[15:54] <apachelogger> if you want to KCM it then don't bother with the buttons to much
[15:55] <apachelogger> install_packages = checkedButton.text() + " " + install_packages
[15:55] <apachelogger> that seems silly
[15:55] <apachelogger> what if text is a localized name?
[15:55] <apachelogger> what if ubuntu-drivers changes so that what you have in text() is no longer the package name at all
[15:55] <apachelogger> ...
[15:55] <shadeslayer> ack
[15:56] <shadeslayer> that needs to be changed
[15:56] <shadeslayer> I changed the text to be description
[15:56] <shadeslayer> so it's no longer the package name
[15:56] <shadeslayer> need to fix that
[15:56] <shadeslayer> ( earlier it was the packagename )
[15:59] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: does it make sense to have a checkbox if there's just one proprietary driver?
[15:59] <shadeslayer> so that the choice is clearer
[15:59] <shadeslayer> or do I want just one radiobutton
[15:59] <shadeslayer> to keep consistency
[16:01] <kubotu> ::workspace-bugs:: [1242729] unjustified package conflict between kde-window-manager and kde-style-bespin @ https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1242729 (by jbell.52)
[16:02] <shadeslayer> I also want to add a small description label under the QRadioButton which is slightly indented to the right
[16:03] <shadeslayer> like the first one http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1839194/qcheckbox-qradiobutton-line-wrap-qt4-6-0
[16:07] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: ^^ ideas?
[16:07]  * Riddell blogs http://blogs.kde.org/2013/10/21/kde-and-kubuntu-linuxcon-edinburgh
[16:08] <apachelogger> ohm
[16:08] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: I think that will have to be a textless radiobutton next to a qlabel
[16:08] <apachelogger> and then another qlabel with the description below the other qlabel
[16:09] <shadeslayer> sigh, sounds quite complicated
[16:09] <apachelogger> that's why qml doesn't have widgets :P
[16:10] <shadeslayer> pfft, QML
[16:12] <apachelogger> http://i.imgur.com/wsO5TgY.png
[16:13] <apachelogger> problem is you have to do some cheating to get it to act as if the label was part of the radio button
[16:13] <apachelogger> i.e. clicking the label must trigger the radio
[16:13] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: maybe KDE has some solution for that though
[16:16] <shadeslayer> hmmm
[16:16] <shadeslayer> fuck the desktop
[16:16] <shadeslayer> lets all use JavaScript
[16:16] <shadeslayer> and Ruby
[16:17] <apachelogger> quite frankly I do not see why you shouldn't write this in QML :P
[16:17] <shadeslayer> QML :(
[16:17] <apachelogger> may be a bit over the top but hey, javscript ftw :P
[16:18] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: oh another option... not sure if that is possible though... would be to hack into the layout of the qradiobutton
[16:18] <shadeslayer> heh, sounds quite the adventure
[17:11] <shadeslayer> apachelogger: btw where can I query Font Sizes from KDE? KGlobalSettings?
[17:50] <claydoh> is this bud something that should be bumped to bko?  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plasma-widget-network-manager/+bug/1242805
[17:51] <claydoh> s/bud/bug
[17:53] <shadeslayer> probably invalid since we don't have p-w-n-m anymore
[18:07] <BluesKaj> claydoh. I just confirmed the bug affects me too , thanks for filing it 
[18:08] <apachelogger> we do not track upstream reports.
[18:09] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: uefi is pretty nifty if you get used to it
[18:09] <apachelogger> you can even add custom entries to the boot manager, so I now have an entry that brings up shell.efi xD
[18:09] <apachelogger> shadeslayer: no clue about the font stuff
[18:59] <apachelogger> Riddell: seems we'll have working uefi and secureboot for .04 :P
[18:59] <apachelogger> I also added QA deadline cards for the both of them
[19:01] <claydoh> BluesKaj: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326403
[19:09] <Riddell> apachelogger: hoorah,well done
[23:38] <valorie> jussi: I think that sounds great, as a thank you gift for people caring enough to squash bugs
[23:49] <ahoneybun> hllo
[23:49] <ahoneybun> hello