| simonizor | Well then... LXQt is super borked on 18.04 daily | 14:28 |
|---|---|---|
| simonizor | https://u.teknik.io/z7DgL.txt | 14:28 |
| simonizor | Just when I thought maybe pcmanfm-qt was going to start working again lol | 14:29 |
| wxl[m] | Well you are running a development version at the beginning of the cycle @simonizor:matrix.org (nice nick btw) | 14:32 |
| simonizor | Yeah, I'm aware, but kinda not a thing that should be happening | 14:33 |
| simonizor | running 0.12 on Tumbleweed without issue | 14:33 |
| wxl[m] | That said I think I heard @tsimonq2 twiddling with the packages yesterday so perhaps he can enlighten us | 14:33 |
| simonizor | like pcmanfm-qt has been broken for a week on 18.04 daily | 14:33 |
| wxl[m] | Yeah it's a packaging issue not an LXQt one | 14:33 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, This is why we call it an *experimental* *pre-Alpha* | 14:38 |
| simonizor | It's running in a VM | 14:38 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Anyways, all of that should have migrated yesterday | 14:38 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Update your system and reboot | 14:38 |
| simonizor | I'm just testing it | 14:38 |
| simonizor | And it's not going well so far lol | 14:39 |
| simonizor | TBH, it's gotten less stable with every LXQt update | 14:39 |
| simonizor | By contrast, the LXQt builds on Tumbleweed have been great. | 14:42 |
| simonizor | So, will you be updating lxqt-common to 0.12 on 18.04 soon? pretty much entirely broken until that happens | 15:04 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, There is no lxqt-common 0.12 | 15:06 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> It was deprecated upstream | 15:06 |
| simonizor | Well, I don't have a session manager without it right now | 15:06 |
| simonizor | I can't reboot, shutdown anything | 15:06 |
| simonizor | So whatever you changed there really broke things | 15:07 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> What do you think agaida? | 15:07 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, And that happens sometimes in Experimental Pre-alpha builds | 15:07 |
| simonizor | I mean, it's not happening to me on Tumbleweed | 15:08 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> That's not experimental and pre-alpha | 15:09 |
| simonizor | I'm just kinda confused how you break deps like this without noticing it | 15:09 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Because agaida messed up dep management | 15:10 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Oh well, it happens | 15:10 |
| simonizor | Oh well is right I guess. Makes me glad I chose Tumbleweed for my main install; the *buntu based LXQt builds have not been all that great TBH | 15:11 |
| wxl | simonizor: it's really not fair to compare rolling releases to non-rolling releases | 15:12 |
| simonizor | I've been testing them on every release since 16.04, and the very start of 18.04 daily was pretty much the only time where I felt like it was really usable | 15:13 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Fwd from tsimonq2: This is why we call it an *experimental* *pre-Alpha* | 15:13 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Not ready to use yet | 15:13 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Breakage is expected | 15:13 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> It will be much better in time for Alpha 1 | 15:14 |
| simonizor | tfw reports bugs and just gets told breakage is expected | 15:14 |
| simonizor | I mean, not really asking you to fix my problems here or anything; just kinda trying to let it be known that shit is broken | 15:15 |
| wxl | this is a "bug report?" | 15:15 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> So yeah, wxl is right | 15:15 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, That's because we know about it already | 15:15 |
| simonizor | Then the nice thing to say would be "Known issue, here's the link" | 15:16 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> I run LXQt on all of my system | 15:16 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> *systems | 15:16 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> I wish I had a link to give | 15:17 |
| wxl | no one has filed a bug report XD | 15:17 |
| wxl | otherwise we'd have one! | 15:17 |
| wxl | and i mean tumbleweed claims breakage is to be expected | 15:17 |
| wxl | that's not an unreasonable thing to say | 15:18 |
| simonizor | This issue is on my 18.04 daily VM, not Tumbleweed FYI | 15:18 |
| wxl | i'm explaining that responding "breakage is to be expected" is not unreasonable | 15:19 |
| simonizor | I mean, they're not pushing experimental builds. They're doing stable builds. Honestly, it's a little shocking that you're still doing experimental builds when 18.04 is like 6 months away | 15:20 |
| wxl | that's exactly how every aspect of ubuntu has worked for years | 15:20 |
| wxl | all 17 years in fact XD | 15:21 |
| simonizor | Most other DEs are using their stable builds on 18.04 daily and fine tuning them | 15:21 |
| simonizor | Like the code freeze cannot be that far off | 15:22 |
| wxl | for this particular case stable means "most recent upstream release" | 15:22 |
| wxl | which, since it's new, is experimental | 15:22 |
| simonizor | It seems really silly to me to still be messing around with experimental stuff right now | 15:22 |
| wxl | it's less than 6 months, i'll give it that | 15:22 |
| simonizor | There's a stable release of 0.12 | 15:22 |
| wxl | but we've got 17 years experience of doing this | 15:22 |
| simonizor | Like breakage this serious is not at all something that I expect with 18.04 release being so close | 15:23 |
| wxl | we're trying to explain to you that's an unreasonable assumption | 15:23 |
| simonizor | and I'm not understanding it at all | 15:24 |
| wxl | but these are the facts | 15:24 |
| simonizor | because there are stable builds of LXQt | 15:24 |
| wxl | regardless of whether or not you understand | 15:24 |
| simonizor | but you're using the experimental ones for some reason | 15:24 |
| wxl | no, we're using the most recent RELEASE | 15:24 |
| simonizor | Don't. | 15:24 |
| wxl | not the HEAD of git | 15:24 |
| simonizor | Use the stable. | 15:24 |
| wxl | the recent release is the stable one | 15:24 |
| simonizor | This is LTS | 15:24 |
| simonizor | Not time to be messing with not stable software | 15:25 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, I literally uploaded LXQt 0.12 a few days ago. Things got untangled less than 24 hours ago. So it's gonna be unstable because we *just* got it in the archive | 15:25 |
| wxl | we're not | 15:25 |
| simonizor | Well, then I'm getting conflicting reports here | 15:25 |
| wxl | nope | 15:25 |
| wxl | you're just not understanding | 15:25 |
| simonizor | You're telling me that you're using experimental builds, and you're telling me that it's the stable release | 15:26 |
| simonizor | which is it? | 15:26 |
| simonizor | I don't think it's being explained very well | 15:26 |
| wxl | do you understand what packaging is? | 15:27 |
| simonizor | Either you're using stable builds of LXQt or you're not | 15:27 |
| simonizor | Yes. | 15:27 |
| wxl | then you can imagine that a fresh package of a stable upstream release is experimental | 15:27 |
| simonizor | Now that makes sense. | 15:28 |
| wxl | that's pretty much the case for EVERYTHING in the development release of non-rolling releases | 15:28 |
| simonizor | Still doesn't validate my complaint of this much breakage so close to LTS release, though. Someone's gotta be better at managing this stuff | 15:29 |
| simonizor | pcmanfm-qt shouldn't be broken for a week; my system shouldn't be broken when you depreciate lxqt-common | 15:29 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, Lubuntu Next won't be LTS so there's that too | 15:30 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> It's not ready | 15:30 |
| simonizor | Yeah, but it be in the repos | 15:31 |
| simonizor | it will* | 15:32 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Either way, the LTS cycle doesn't differ in that we have breakage at the beginning of the cycle. | 15:32 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> We update to new things. Less so in the LTS, but Lubuntu Next isn't LTS. | 15:32 |
| simonizor | The packages will be available on LTS, no? | 15:32 |
| simonizor | That in and of itself says they are stable | 15:33 |
| simonizor | If they are not stable, they should not be in the LTS repos | 15:33 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, No it doesn't. | 15:36 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> Do you know how flavor support cycles actually work? | 15:36 |
| simonizor | Pretty sure Canonical would disagree with that | 15:36 |
| simonizor | Packages in the LTS repos are supposed to be stable packages that only get security updates for the most part | 15:37 |
| wxl[m] | Canonical only provides infrastructure except for their core products, of which lx anything is not | 15:38 |
| simonizor | That's not the point; the point is that packages that are accepted into the LTS repos are supposed to be stable packages that for the most part only get security updates | 15:38 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, Except that Canonical doesn't provide security support for flavors. We do that. | 15:40 |
| wxl[m] | Also LTS is a distribution version thing, not a per package one | 15:40 |
| simonizor | Yes, but at this point, it's seeming like LXQt would need far more than security updates when LTS hits | 15:41 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, Feel free to ask the Ubuntu Release Team | 15:41 |
| simonizor | Therefore, LXQt should not be in the LTS repos unless it plans on being stable by LTS | 15:41 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> They can confirm what I've said. | 15:41 |
| wxl[m] | You're right it does need more and we're working on it | 15:41 |
| simonizor | Like LXQt in 16.04 is pretty broken too | 15:42 |
| simonizor | It's not acceptable IMO to have broken packages in LTS repos | 15:42 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, But that's flawed logic. The only reason a flavor is LTS is because that team is willing to support it for that long, which we aren't. | 15:42 |
| simonizor | Then you shouldn't be in the LTS repos, honestly | 15:42 |
| simonizor | If you are not willing to support your package for the entire LTS term, it should not be in the LTS repos | 15:43 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @simonizor, There are no "LTS repos" | 15:44 |
| simonizor | The repos that are used by the LTS release. | 15:44 |
| simonizor | Y'know what I mean lol | 15:44 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> I'm guessing you're basing your logic on the way OpenSUSE does things, and we don't do it that way. | 15:44 |
| simonizor | No | 15:44 |
| simonizor | I'm a long time *buntu user | 15:44 |
| simonizor | just switched to Tumbleweed | 15:44 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> We don't pull packages in to the LTS release. We release what we have in the development release as an LTS | 15:45 |
| simonizor | That's silly | 15:45 |
| simonizor | No one should do tht | 15:45 |
| simonizor | that* | 15:45 |
| simonizor | You don't put development releases in the LTS release | 15:46 |
| simonizor | Unless it clearly says in the package name | 15:46 |
| wxl[m] | Where are these LTS repos? | 15:46 |
| simonizor | check your apt sources list | 15:46 |
| simonizor | Those would be the repos I'm talking about | 15:46 |
| wxl[m] | I just see repos not LTS ones | 15:47 |
| simonizor | If it says xenial, it's LTS | 15:47 |
| wxl[m] | Nope | 15:48 |
| simonizor | Yes. | 15:48 |
| simonizor | Xenial is the LTS release | 15:48 |
| simonizor | therefore the xenial repos are the LTS repos | 15:48 |
| wxl[m] | LTS refers to support of a whole flavor and its packages, not every package in the repos | 15:49 |
| wxl[m] | And no flavor has a stable release including lxqt | 15:49 |
| simonizor | The repos for the LTS release are supposed to have stable packages in them | 15:50 |
| simonizor | the packages in those repos are not supposed to get updates other than security updates | 15:50 |
| wxl[m] | Not true | 15:50 |
| simonizor | It is, though | 15:50 |
| simonizor | What other software do you see pushing development releases to LTS repos? | 15:51 |
| simonizor | as their main package | 15:51 |
| wxl[m] | Read about SRUs and Backports | 15:51 |
| simonizor | Those are PPAs | 15:51 |
| wxl[m] | No | 15:51 |
| wxl[m] | I understand why you think what you do but it does not match reality | 15:52 |
| agaida | Maybe the wrong understanding of stable | 15:53 |
| wxl[m] | If you want to question this more ask #ubuntu-release or -devel or just read free documentation on the wiki | 15:54 |
| wxl[m] | Weirdest bug report ever | 15:57 |
| wxl[m] | How DOES development work on rolling releases? | 16:01 |
| agaida | thats easy - upstream yell "Release!", someone get the code and upload the new release as far as possible without to much testing - thats what users are for | 16:05 |
| agaida | and the most or well known rolling releases try not to patch the original sources because sources and patches will change over time - to much work, to slow | 16:06 |
| wxl | yeesh | 16:07 |
| wxl | bug 1734147 | 16:08 |
| agaida | and thats fine - users will get the most unfiltered upstream bugs from all projects and can write meaningful bug reports - and because such distributions are harder to run as debian or ubuntu the most people have more knowledge about their systems - so the bug reports are mostly useful :D | 16:08 |
| ubot93 | Bug 1734147 in grub2 (Ubuntu) "Ubuntu 17.10 corrupting BIOS - many LENOVO laptops models" [High, Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1734147 | 16:08 |
| wxl | yeah | 16:09 |
| wxl | emphasis on most and mostly XD | 16:09 |
| agaida | at least it was at the time i left arch for siduction | 16:12 |
| agaida | ok - six - seven years ago, times may change - and i don't see manjaro as a rolling geekly linux ... | 16:13 |
| wxl | i like it | 17:30 |
| wxl | neovim? | 17:30 |
| wxl | i will say for lisp languages, i do prefer evil-mode emacs | 17:31 |
| wxl | from a user perspective, it's pretty vimmy | 17:31 |
| wxl | cyphermox: i think we're still running into this issue. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1205397 any idea on how we could fix this? outside of getting rid of zram, which is consistent with lubuntu's goals | 17:34 |
| ubot93 | Launchpad bug 1205397 in ubiquity (Ubuntu) "encrypted install fails because unsafe swap (zram) is detected" [Medium, Confirmed] | 17:34 |
| cyphermox | wxl: whatever checks for that might need to be told that zram is okay | 18:05 |
| cyphermox | or maybe there's something to tell zram, I don't know | 18:05 |
| cyphermox | I'll have a look | 18:05 |
| wxl | cyphermox: if there's someone else i should hit with this, let me know | 18:05 |
| cyphermox | well, sounds like a uiquity thing, so it's me | 18:05 |
| wxl | that's what i figured :) | 18:06 |
| wxl | we need tasks on gci, tsimonq2 | 20:07 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @wxl, Make a task in Phab and I'll get to it. Give suggestions you might have from a QA POV | 20:09 |
| wxl | can we set a redirect to phab from phabulous.lubuntu.me? XD | 21:02 |
| wxl | hm wonder if this is still a thing https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1376380 | 21:10 |
| ubot93 | Launchpad bug 1376380 in lxsession (Ubuntu) "lxsession risks filling disk with improper log handling" [Undecided, Confirmed] | 21:10 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> You can file that RT XD | 21:51 |
| lubot | <tsimonq2> @tsimonq2, That was to wxl about Phab domain | 21:53 |
| wxl | heheh | 21:54 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!