[11:05] knome: Should this bug forever hang around as "Confirmed"? [11:05] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xubuntu-default-settings/+bug/1314153 [11:05] Launchpad bug 1314153 in xubuntu-default-settings (Ubuntu) "XUbuntu reinstalls all default packages on release update" [Low,Confirmed] [11:06] it's not even an actual bug, or? [11:10] bluesabre, it shouldn't, we should fix it [11:10] not sure I understand the problem... this is how all ubuntu release upgrades work [11:11] or am I mistaken? [11:11] ok, so: [11:11] 1) user installs xubuntu [11:12] 2) user purges abiword, which in turn removes xubuntu-desktop [11:12] 3) user upgrades, abiword is installed [11:12] that *is* a bug [11:12] iirc abiword and gnumeric were the things that this concerned [11:13] there is no way to keep the xubuntu default settings packge (and get all the nice branding) but not install abiword on every upgrade [11:14] xubuntu-default-settings doesn't depend on xubuntu-desktop or abiword [11:14] i can set up a testing environment at some point [11:15] all you have to do to test this is install, remove abiword, and upgrade [11:16] actually, since i seem to have trusty images, let me try this [11:16] that's always been a bug [11:17] xubuntu-desktop only recommends abiword, so I guess that the upgrade process just reinstalls all the recommended packages [11:17] bluesabre, but the user doesn't have xubuntu-desktop if they removed abiword. [11:17] brainwash, ^ [11:17] it's the reason why you can install ubuntu -> apt-get xubuntu-desktop -> do-release-upgrade, and then sudden your install has turned into xubuntu [11:18] but this is not about having xubuntu-desktop [11:18] its not about xubuntu-default-settings either, this is a bug in ubuntu-release-upgrader [11:18] so how does ubuntu-release-upgrader figure out that it wants to install me xubuntu-dekstop stuff? [11:19] dunno, looking into it now [11:19] ta [11:19] if you need testing, tell me [11:19] i'll boot a trusty vm up soon to try this as well [11:19] and do an upgrade test while i'm on it [11:19] it's just that i need to zsync half of the trusty image :P [11:25] :) [11:25] also, "Acid pink" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-release-upgrader/+bug/1374533 [11:25] Launchpad bug 1373280 in xubuntu-default-settings (Ubuntu) "duplicate for #1374533 Pink background on selected items" [Undecided,Invalid] [11:25] :D [11:25] yess [11:26] hippies [11:26] ;) [11:26] :) [11:26] elfy, soon doing an upgrade test with amd64, woohoo ;) [11:26] I saw [11:26] only a tad late. ;) [11:27] don't worry too much - I've decided to care as much about testing as everyone else [11:27] that's probably a good attitude for this cycle [11:27] mmm [11:27] hmm [11:27] knome: for the upgrade bug, I see that it was originally set for ubuntu-release-upgrader, but you changed it to xubuntu-default-settings? [11:27] shame that much of team had the same attitude last cycle [11:28] did trusty have the black bg bug previously too? [11:28] elfy, that is [11:28] knome: at one point yes - xnox was in here talking about it iirc [11:28] bluesabre, apparently so ;) [11:28] ok, since i have it with the daily [11:28] yea [11:29] there is a bug report for it knome [11:29] i know [11:29] just digging it up [11:29] I remember bugging xnox with this background bug [11:29] aaah - nvm - iirc wrongly [11:30] last time we had a debian background [11:30] yes [11:30] but it does go wrong during every cycle I've had anything to do with testing wise [11:31] elfy, that's sad thing to happen [11:31] we even changed our wallpaper to be a symlink [11:31] to avoid having to change paths in various packages [11:31] but now it seems to have some other issue [11:31] I remember that conversation [11:32] so - something is still up with it then - if we've not changed then I guess it's something to do with making everything ok for some phone somewhere [11:32] heh [11:33] now that we've landed that and seen some bug reports coming in, do we still think it's fine to edit existing installations to have the pink highlight? [11:33] it's far more obvious that it's a release-specific thing when you install 14.10, but it can be a bit weird to upgrade to such [11:34] well given that people read release notes as much as topics/stickies - I say change it - perhaps they will read next time ;) [11:35] heh [11:35] i don't think that helps, [11:35] two people have already taken the time to file a bug instead of reading the release announcement ;) [11:36] you're not surprised surely? [11:36] the installation should probably wipe out all their data until they learned to read the release notes, but implementing THAT would be a bit too brutal [11:36] of course i'm not surprised [11:37] it does do that if they choose the wrong option ;) [11:37] lol [11:37] true [11:38] bug 1265192 :) [11:38] bug 1265192 in ubiquity (Ubuntu Trusty) "Install/reinstall wipes out all/other partitions" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1265192 [11:38] yep, seen that [11:39] imo unless the installer comes with an autopilot like Airplane then people will always read what they *think* it says [11:40] hehe [11:40] yep... [11:40] great, done zsyncing utopic amd64 [11:41] ...aaaand i386 [11:48] bluesabre, confirming: [11:49] 1) clean install, purge abiword, gnumeric and xubuntu-desktop [11:49] 2) start upgrade: proposes to install abiword, gnumeric and xubuntu-desktop [11:49] what's pulling these in? [11:50] Pretty sure its the release upgrader. Otherwise removing a single app from anything would mean never getting any more new/replaced packages on upgrade. [11:51] considering Ubuntu knows how you installed it, this doesn't seem so unlikely [11:51] "InstallationMedia: Xubuntu 14.04 LTS "Trusty Tahr" - Release i386 (20140416.2)" [11:51] sure. [11:51] but still, i fail to see the logic why it wants to force those packages on me [11:52] I'll check out the source code, 430 open bugs is a bit much to wade through [11:52] doing another test. [11:54] env variables... [11:54] RELEASE_UPGRADE_NO_FORCE_OVERWRITE: [11:54] - if that is set, no --force-overwrite is used [11:54] could be useful [11:55] hmm [12:01] Yeah, I think it auto-detects based on dependencies... https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/utopic/ubuntu-release-upgrader/utopic/view/head:/data/DistUpgrade.cfg#L63 [12:02] still digging around [12:02] this thing is huge [12:04] ubuntu-release-upgrader is not just a normal upgrade tool, it's actually "smart" :) [12:05] I think it makes sense though... Are you running xubuntu 14.04 if you removed xubuntu desktop in 6.06 and then upgraded your way without picking up any of our new packages? [12:05] you'd still be listening to music with listen [12:07] I wouldn't want to support that upgrade [12:07] yeah, not a bug after all, the upgrade process is intended to work this way [12:07] knome: thoughts? [12:07] moreover, it's not xubuntu specific [12:07] right [12:09] maybe the program could be extended with a new KeepRemovedPackages [12:09] but I can imagine that being kludgey [12:22] bluesabre, did you try what NO_FORCE_OVERWRITE actually does? [12:22] I did not [12:22] bluesabre, well, users can install listen even if it wasn't pulled in [12:22] I know [12:23] i mean, it really isn't much different from supporting any system with random packages the user needs [12:23] so if somebody removes abiword in 13.10, they should not get light-locker in 14.04? [12:23] bluesabre, no, they should not get abiword in 13.10 [12:23] err, in 14.04.. [12:24] tiger [12:24] hmm [12:24] there you go, my testing password [12:24] longer than test [12:24] yes, and much more imagination-requiring! :P [12:24] but yeah, not a bug in xubuntu-default-settings, a bug in ubuntu-release-upgrader [12:24] and harder to type [12:25] :) [12:26] because ultimately we're dealing with apt, so the upgrader would need to be extended to diff a base install, see whats missing, and remove that after upgrade [12:26] bluesabre, or simply just not install removed packages [12:26] * bluesabre is not volunteering [12:26] that are recommended [12:28] yes, doing "export RELEASE_UPGRADE_NO_FORCE_OVERWRITE=true" gives me the expected results (from my pov) [12:28] of course it's a problem if we need new packages to be installed [12:29] but IMO it's also a problem if the user is forced to install software they removed [12:29] d [12:29] not really sure it's that much of a problem [12:30] to me, it is a problem [12:30] if i purge abiword and gnumeric, that means i do not want them [12:30] ever. [12:30] I want xchat - always ;) [12:30] and it's stupid that i'm forced to get those back on every upgrade, and use my time and bandwidth [12:34] ok, another problem [12:34] lol [12:34] now i can't revert the env var, even if i unset [12:34] bluesabre, what are you lolling at? :P [12:35] knome: you're complaining a lot about this app to folks that don't develop this app ;) [12:35] bluesabre, stuff happens... and really, i'm just laying out my own thoughts, and want feedback from you [12:35] and want to know if you consider it as a problem [12:36] or if it's best for me to shut down [12:36] I don't consider it such a problem. Sure, you're getting things back that you removed, which is a pain [12:36] bluesabre, fwiw, even with the no force overwrite bit, i'm getting new packages [12:37] like greybird-gtk-theme [12:37] But, if the user removes a lot of things, they probably don't really want xubuntu [12:37] so it's not like i'm falling behing because i don't have xubuntu-desktop [12:37] shimmer-themes broke out into the individual themes for 14.10 [12:37] yes [12:37] which is what i'm saying... [12:38] shimmer-themes is an empty file now, you're going to get replacements [12:38] i still get that update [12:38] even if i don't have xubuntu-desktop [12:38] right [12:38] what else new packages do we have? [12:38] i get inxi too. [12:39] for some reason, build-essential is installed for me, but whatever, that's a minor issue. [12:39] (this is a clean trusty update, with abiword/gnumeric/xubuntu-desktop purged) [12:39] yup [12:39] err, trusty install .P [12:39] its still an upgrade [12:39] so you're getting xubuntu 14.10 [12:39] exactly [12:39] without the packages i don't want [12:39] not ubuntu + xfce 14.10 [12:39] so once i've upgraded, [12:39] i'm still using xubuntu [12:40] not an anomaly of a system we don't want to support, as you implied before ;) [12:40] i'm not saying we should *encourage* people to use this method [12:40] but i think it's fair to have it [12:40] i guess another possibility is... [12:40] so you get everything except abiword/gnumeric in this case? [12:40] is there a way to pin a package in a way that it never gets installed? [12:40] i believe so [12:41] it's hard to compare the lists since i can't revert the var :P [12:41] which is one argument against it [12:41] let me do a quickish reinstall... [12:42] http://paste.ubuntu.com/8447482/ [12:42] that's the list with the bit set [12:43] cool [12:43] so again, it's not like that's a broken system after that [12:43] not sure how that would work out if one did many many upgrades [12:55] ok, let's see what the list looks like without the bit [12:55] dun dun dun dun dun [12:56] http://paste.ubuntu.com/8447565/ [12:57] neat [12:58] want to add a comment to that bug report then? [12:58] not yet [12:58] i'll need to check something else as well [12:58] and i'm not sure if i want to mention that on a bug report with no disclaimers [12:59] actually, i think i know a much better variant [12:59] pin the package name with priority -1, and even the upgrader won't install it [12:59] now, sure, people can break their systems BADLY with this [13:00] but at least there's an easy fix... remove pins and upgrade [13:02] the thing that scares me about the bit you mentioned is that it's hardly documented all (try googling with the name!) and all references seem to be really old [14:00] its in the README [14:00] :) [14:01] https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/utopic/ubuntu-release-upgrader/utopic/view/head:/DistUpgrade/README [14:19] bluesabre, right, then that just didn't pop up in the search results (or i missed it) [16:32] * vertz pokes brainwash [16:38] hi vertz [16:40] hey [18:30] why is synclient set to VertEdgeScroll = 1 when you have two finger scroll enable? [18:30] and also [18:31] ~/.config/xfce4/xfconf/xfce-perchannel-xml/pointers.xml has some odd values [18:31] which make you accidently paste whatever you have on clipboard all over the place [18:31] this goes for laptops of course [18:33] synaptics_tap_action array should be set to [0,0,0,0,0,0,0] [21:08] hehe [21:24] hmm? [23:08] Shiny, es is almost there.