=== ara is now known as Guest22932 === chrisccoulson_ is now known as chrisccoulson === greyback__ is now known as greyback [13:17] Hi everybody [13:18] I think there is a problem in networkmanager dependencies [13:18] It no longer uses ppp for pppoe/adsl connections, it uses pppoe binary [13:18] Where should I report this [13:23] mustafam: which pppoe binary exactly? [13:24] The ppp package provides an rp-pppoe.so plugin. Does it use that, or does it use the separate pppoe pty wrapper? [13:26] As per http://cgit.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager/commit/?h=nm-0-9-10&id=7955806a02db64b20079267743056d7d9d45af3b [13:27] "for now, work around this by using the userland pppoe client rather than the kernel code" [13:27] ppp is not enough [13:28] I use pppoe connection, it does not work unless I install pppoe package (binary executable) [13:28] Ah, so this is a switch from rp-pppoe.so to the separate pppoe binary. [13:29] I think so [13:29] pppoe is in universe, so network-manager cannot depend on it or recommend it. [13:29] I use the latest daily images and it is affected [13:30] So will ubuntu ship with broken dsl/pppoe? [13:30] You can file a bug against network-manager. Either pppoe will remain in universe, or it could be promoted to main. [13:30] I have WiFi addon card, but what about ethernet only? [13:30] If the decision is for it to remain in universe, then network-manager could suggest pppoe, but users would need to install it manually to get pppoe functionality. [13:31] I'll report a bug, but if somebody have only wired pppoe, how should he connect to install it manually [13:32] go to a coffee shop with free wifi or download the package separately on another system and then install it manually? [13:32] Desktop? [13:32] OK, I know it's the networkmanager folks decision [13:33] desktop, laptop, android phone that can handle downloads the way you need it to, etc. [13:33] OK, thank you. [13:33] probably other methods, but that's probably the 'quickest' way to get the .deb package [13:34] you should still file the bug though :) [13:34] Of course I will [13:34] mustafam: you do have a valid case to have the pppoe binary shipped there. You should point it out in the bug. [13:34] It's pretty late in the day for Vivid though. [13:35] Can it be "urgent"? [13:35] Release is in two days. [13:35] Right [13:35] pppoe would be considered security sensitive, so it'd need a security review and possibly an apparmor profile before bringing it into main, which would be required for it to ship in the installer. [13:36] PPPoE directly from a desktop machine is also a pretty extreme edge case. Most who use PPPoE use routers. [13:36] indeed [13:36] OK, I'll see what can they do :) [13:37] Thank you, bye. [14:11] so, https://lists.launchpad.net/ubuntu-bugcontrol/msg04322.html is something I haven't seen much of here. Wouldn't the proposed change in the bug (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/samba4/+bug/1442039) not be a valid change for an SRU? [14:11] Ubuntu bug 1442039 in samba4 (Ubuntu) "Samba 4.1.6 has userlock bug - fixed in 4.2.0" [Undecided,Confirmed] [14:11] * teward is concerned about feature changes [14:12] rbasak: you've commented on the bug previously, I don't think they listened to you in comment #3 [14:21] looks like lfaraone got to it and responded to the bug [14:31] :P [14:31] it isn't SRU-worthy [14:33] lfaraone: ah, thanks. I thought it was a bug on first glance. Now that he's described it fully it definitely sounds like a feature. [14:34] I reported this: [14:34] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/network-manager/+bug/1446689 [14:34] Ubuntu bug 1446689 in network-manager (Ubuntu) "networkmanager requires pppoe but it is not in "requires"" [Undecided,New] [14:35] It can be fixed by configuring --with-pppoe=/usr/sbin/pppd [14:46] lfaraone: that's what i thought, i was going to say something to that effect but you beat me to it xD === pgraner is now known as pgraner-afk [15:55] Hi, could someone nominate https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/totem-plugin-arte/+bug/1445829 for Trusty and Utopic ? [15:55] Ubuntu bug 1445829 in totem-plugin-arte (Ubuntu) "No video playback possible - side pane empty" [Undecided,In progress] [17:30] Hi, I'm not sure my former message was sent so here it is again: [17:30] Could someone nominate https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/totem-plugin-arte/+bug/1445829 for both Trusty and Utopic? [17:30] Ubuntu bug 1445829 in totem-plugin-arte (Ubuntu) "No video playback possible - side pane empty" [Undecided,In progress] [17:34] Malizor: are you aware that this needs to be fixed in Vivid first, and then fixes backported to Trusty and Utopic? [17:36] rbasak: That's another problem: this is not fixable in Vivid because Totem > 3.10 dropped support for "old" plugins like totem-plugin-arte [17:37] The package should ideally be removed from Vivid, but I don't know how to request it [17:37] Malizor: file a bug against the package requesting removal and subscribe ~ubuntu-archive. [17:38] Malizor: I'll add the bug tasks for Trusty and Utopic for you, but please file that other bug, link to it from this one, explain in a comment what's going on and then mark the main task in this bug Invalid. [17:38] rbasak: will do [17:39] Thanks! [17:39] rbasak: no, thank you :-) [17:39] Malizor: well, you're doing the work, and we appreciate that :) [17:56] rbasak: done [17:56] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/totem-plugin-arte/+bug/1446775 [17:56] Ubuntu bug 1446775 in totem-plugin-arte (Ubuntu) "Please remove totem-plugin-arte from Vivid" [Undecided,New] [17:57] Malizor: looks great. Thank you!