| callmepk | morning | 00:52 |
|---|---|---|
| duflu | Morning callmepk | 01:29 |
| callmepk | morning duflu | 01:30 |
| KGB-1 | gobject-introspection debian/master Janitor * [update] merge request !7: Apply hints suggested by the multi-arch hinter * https://deb.li/3yxUR | 05:20 |
| KGB-1 | gobject-introspection debian/master Janitor * [update] merge request !7: Apply hints suggested by the multi-arch hinter * https://deb.li/3yxUR | 05:21 |
| doko | is robert_ancell online? | 06:08 |
| duflu | It's Friday night for him so unlikely | 06:17 |
| doko | k, didn't see him yesterday either | 06:32 |
| oSoMoN | good morning desktoppers | 07:18 |
| duflu | Morning oSoMoN | 07:21 |
| oSoMoN | good afternoon duflu | 07:22 |
| didrocks | good morning | 08:04 |
| duflu | Morning didrocks | 08:09 |
| didrocks | hey duflu | 08:17 |
| seb128 | goood morning desktopers | 08:29 |
| duflu | Hi seb128 | 08:30 |
| seb128 | hey duflu , are you feeling better today? | 08:31 |
| duflu | seb128, going well other than mild food poisoning :/ | 08:31 |
| duflu | seb128, how are you? Do you think we should do the meeting today or not? | 08:31 |
| duflu | I'm deep in some difficult problems so would appreciate the extra time | 08:32 |
| seb128 | :-( on the food poisoning | 08:33 |
| seb128 | duflu, I don't think it's mandatory, if you are in the middle of work you want to finish I would suggest you just keep doing that | 08:33 |
| seb128 | technically I'm my friday off but I was away most of the morning yesterday so I will probably do another half day today, I might join but I'm not decided myself | 08:34 |
| seb128 | oh, and I'm alright | 08:34 |
| seb128 | it's friday and sunny and my stomach feels better :) | 08:35 |
| duflu | \o/ | 08:37 |
| didrocks | hey seb128, ready for a good week-end it seems :) | 08:43 |
| seb128 | didrocks, hey, indeed! you? | 08:46 |
| seb128 | jamesh, hey, do you know if bug #1902915 was already discussed somewhere? | 08:46 |
| ubot5 | bug 1902915 in snapd (Ubuntu) "snapd doesn't ensure portals are available even when they are needed" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1902915 | 08:46 |
| * jamesh looks | 08:46 | |
| seb128 | jamesh, basically we got a report that thunderbird was displaying no fileselector, it turned you that the system didn't have the gtk portal installed | 08:47 |
| seb128 | jamesh, it feels like snapd should offer to install it or something in those cases | 08:47 |
| seb128 | since we can't really garanty the portals are going to be installed, and some snaps in practice aren't going to be functional without | 08:48 |
| didrocks | seb128: I’m good thanks :) removing one road block after another, so feels progress ! | 08:48 |
| seb128 | didrocks, great :) | 08:49 |
| jamesh | seb128: There has been push-back against making it a dependency of the snapd deb, as portals won't be necessary on server systems. There isn't currently any code in snapd for prompting to install debs or rpms | 08:49 |
| marcustomlinson | morning desktoppers | 08:49 |
| seb128 | jamesh, right, I don't think depends would be right as you said | 08:50 |
| jamesh | and recommends/suggests don't guarantee it will be installed either | 08:50 |
| seb128 | jamesh, do you know if flatpak handle those situations any better? | 08:51 |
| seb128 | right | 08:51 |
| seb128 | I don't really see a way out of installing on demand | 08:51 |
| seb128 | or at least displaying a dialog saying that the snap isn't going to work without the portal | 08:51 |
| jamesh | seb128: flatpak has Recommends: xdg-desktop-portal | 08:51 |
| seb128 | well, Recommends doesn't guarantee it's installed as you said | 08:52 |
| seb128 | I meant rather on the software side, do they do anything smart when the portal is missing? | 08:52 |
| jamesh | the decision's a bit easier there, since they're not covering system daemons | 08:52 |
| seb128 | or are flatpak just randomnly not working? | 08:52 |
| jamesh | I'm not sure. And I don't know whether it would catch the case of xdg-desktop-portal installed without a backend like x-d-p-gtk | 08:53 |
| seb128 | well, recommends are not depends | 08:54 |
| seb128 | some distros don't install those by default | 08:54 |
| seb128 | some users change their apt config, I mean there are going to be similar cases | 08:54 |
| seb128 | anyway it doesn't help us much with the snap case, I was just curious to know what they were doing | 08:54 |
| seb128 | jamesh, would it be possible/make sense to have something in the gnome extension that checks if the dbus name is owned and display a warning if it's not? | 08:56 |
| seb128 | warning if zenity type of graphical warning 'your snap might not be functionnal without portals, we recommend you install xdg-desktop-portal' | 08:56 |
| jamesh | seb128: the name will still be available if you remove xdg-desktop-portal-gtk | 08:56 |
| jamesh | just some of the APIs will no longer be available (like the file selector) | 08:57 |
| seb128 | I wonder if that user had xdg-desktop-portal | 08:57 |
| seb128 | I expect he probably had none of the portals | 08:57 |
| jamesh | the bug says "remove xdg-desktop-portal-gtk", which probably means it is still installed | 08:57 |
| seb128 | no, that's me who edited the description | 08:58 |
| seb128 | the initial report was | 08:58 |
| seb128 | 'installed thunderbird, clicking add attachement -> no fileselector' | 08:58 |
| seb128 | I asked if he had xdg-desktop-portal-gtk and he said no, installed it and it works now | 08:58 |
| seb128 | I didn't think about asking if xdg-desktop-portal was installed | 08:58 |
| jamesh | fair enough. That probably caused xdg-desktop-portal to be installed too | 08:59 |
| seb128 | right | 08:59 |
| seb128 | in any case we could have cases where those are missing, would be nice to handle that better | 08:59 |
| seb128 | like people starting from a minimal install or a flavor not recommending portals | 08:59 |
| jamesh | I don't see anything obvious doing a Github code search of the flatpak repo. | 09:00 |
| Laney | yo | 09:00 |
| * jamesh wonders what the Fedora packages look like | 09:01 | |
| seb128 | Laney, hey, happy friday! how are you? | 09:01 |
| seb128 | jamesh, I'm probably going to start by suggesting we do the 'check dbus, display warning if missing' thing in the gnome extension | 09:01 |
| jamesh | seb128: looks like Fedora used to use Requires: but downgraded to Recommends: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/flatpak/blob/master/f/flatpak.spec#_67 | 09:02 |
| seb128 | it's not great but better than nothing and should be easy enough to do | 09:02 |
| jamesh | seb128: I thought the code in GTK fell back to an in-process file selector if the portal file selector wasn't available | 09:02 |
| jamesh | I'd have to double check that | 09:03 |
| seb128 | it does seem to do that | 09:04 |
| seb128 | I removed the portals and tried with the portal-test | 09:05 |
| seb128 | ah, I forgot to stop the active ones | 09:07 |
| seb128 | if I remove -gtk it fails | 09:07 |
| seb128 | (portal-test:30804): Gtk-WARNING **: 10:06:59.005: Can't open portal file chooser: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.UnknownMethod: No such interface “org.freedesktop.portal.FileChooser” on object at path /org/freedesktop/portal/desktop | 09:07 |
| seb128 | and no fileselector displayed at all | 09:07 |
| GunnarHj | Hi Laney, it looks to me as if this patch can be dropped: | 09:19 |
| GunnarHj | https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/vte2.91/-/blob/ubuntu/master/debian/patches/0001-Add-the-style-context-provider-with-FALLBACK-priorit.patch | 09:19 |
| GunnarHj | but your confirmation would be valuable. | 09:19 |
| Laney | hi seb128 | 09:20 |
| Laney | doing good, you? | 09:20 |
| Laney | hi GunnarHj | 09:20 |
| Laney | what makes you think that? | 09:20 |
| seb128 | I'm alright! sunny friday | 09:20 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: New upstream code, similar to the patch. | 09:20 |
| GunnarHj | (but not identical) | 09:21 |
| didrocks | hey Laney | 09:22 |
| luna_ | hey | 09:23 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: Basically you can if you want to risk breaking the rules in Ambiance and Radiance which rely/relied on this, or check they still work with this new thing, or maybe they got broken already and nobody noticed or cared | 09:27 |
| Laney | moin didrocks and luna_ | 09:27 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Seems easiest to drop it and see what happens for now (apparently it doesn't apply any longer). And revisit if some issue shows up. | 09:29 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Is that ok with you? | 09:30 |
| Laney | That wasn't any of the options I presented | 09:30 |
| Laney | If you want to drop it, do it knowingly and actively IMO | 09:31 |
| Laney | Like: we are breaking this rule in light-themes, and I've decided that is fine to do | 09:31 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: TBH I don't even know what to look for. Playing with vte2.91 with the goal to be able to upgrade gnome-terminal... | 09:32 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Would it be an option to keep the additional stuff on top of the new code? | 09:34 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Or would the patch need to be rewritten completely? | 09:35 |
| Laney | I dunno, I'll have to look | 09:36 |
| Laney | to test: open a Unity session (or use Ambiance) | 09:36 |
| Laney | open gnome-terminal and check how it looks, upgrade vte2.91 and check again | 09:36 |
| Laney | you can see what the rules are about in gtk-3.20/apps/gnome-terminal.css | 09:36 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: I just built it locally without the patch. Will check out what gnome-terminal and Unity look like. | 09:39 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: See nothing weird in gnome-terminal or Unity. | 09:49 |
| Laney | Weird no, but different? | 10:00 |
| Laney | Scrollbars OK? Transparency OK? | 10:00 |
| Laney | I expect the terminal will work, but it might lose the theming that we were applying there | 10:02 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: I don't think I'm the right person to evaluate that. Looks the about the same to me, but I don't have the sense for details which would be needed. How about letting me upload to hirsute and then others can easily check it out. (Or I can upload to a PPA.) | 10:06 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: Here: https://people.canonical.com/~laney/weird-things/terminal-groovy-unity.png | 10:17 |
| Laney | See how the terminal is transparent a bit, and how the scrollbar looks - that's what I think is made to work by this patch. | 10:17 |
| Laney | (making that transparency happen by default - you can always go change it in the preferences) | 10:18 |
| Laney | so check that you can see this, and then how it looks in that respect after upgrading | 10:18 |
| Laney | If it goes away, then you broke it, and then you can decide if that's something you want to do with your eyes open. :-) | 10:18 |
| === cpaelzer_ is now known as cpaelzer | ||
| Laney | (I think it's probably OK to do that though, just that we should do it knowingly) | 10:21 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Thanks for the screenshot! Hmm.. I think the transparency is gone and the scoll thing is not orange unless active. So things did change. But personally I usually don't notice such things, while others might be very upset. ;) | 10:32 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: OTOH I see no difference when going back to the -release version. Just uploaded to PPA: | 11:01 |
| GunnarHj | https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj/+archive/ubuntu/vte2.91 | 11:01 |
| GunnarHj | Please install from there and let me know what you think. (I'll be AFK for an hour or so now.) | 11:01 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: It breaks the default background colour. Under Unity it becomes white and under GNOME Shell it becomes black. | 11:17 |
| Laney | I think the new version breaks how Yaru is trying to set colours on the terminal too. | 11:22 |
| Laney | The background-color and color entries in style_provider should be moved to fallback_style_provider for us I think. And it seems likely that we will need to keep this patch even though upstream has dropped it for 0.63. For us the background colour isn't the same as @text_view_bg but AFAICT they aren't interested in that scenario so we need to keep it downstream (maybe it'd be fine in Debian though). | 11:32 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Ok, I'll make an attempt to refresh it then. | 11:41 |
| Laney | Alright. Show me it if you want and I'll check it out. Thanks! | 11:45 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: I uploaded to the PPA again, this time with the refreshed patch: | 12:56 |
| GunnarHj | https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj/+archive/ubuntu/vte2.91 | 12:56 |
| GunnarHj | I still see no difference, so please confirm that this looks right. | 12:56 |
| Laney | Why are you seeing no difference? | 12:57 |
| Laney | Try with a clean user or something. | 12:57 |
| GunnarHj | No idea. | 12:57 |
| Laney | The background goes from purple to black (or white), it should be quite obvious | 12:58 |
| GunnarHj | Yeah, maybe clean user.. | 12:58 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: It looks a bit wrong to me though - what I would expect to see now (with this fallback_style_provider) is something looking like this: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/jn5HTxZPWJ/ | 13:09 |
| Laney | It's probably a new patch now though with a description something like "Allow background-color and color to be customised via the theme on VteTerminal widgets\n\nYaru and Ambiance/Radiance need this. Move the CSS rules to the fallback style class so that they can be overridden." | 13:11 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Now I'm confused. Probably better you fix the patch yourself. | 13:16 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Btw, fresh user didn't help. Can it be that I'm using NVIDIA? | 13:19 |
| Laney | No | 13:20 |
| GunnarHj | Ok. (Hope that was only your answer to the question.) | 13:21 |
| Laney | Fine, I'll do the merge | 13:24 |
| Laney | feel like you lured me into doing this :P | 13:24 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: I can upload what I have and leave the refreshing to you. | 13:25 |
| GunnarHj | s/upload/push/ | 13:25 |
| Laney | Ok | 13:25 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Done. https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/vte2.91/-/tree/ubuntu/master | 13:28 |
| KGB-0 | vte2.91 signed tags c18ea6d Iain Lane ubuntu/0.62.1-1ubuntu1 * vte2.91 Debian release 0.62.1-1ubuntu1 * https://deb.li/0goC | 13:45 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: There you go | 13:45 |
| KGB-0 | vte2.91 ubuntu/master d251047 Iain Lane debian/patches/ 91_keep_fds.patch series Allow-background-color-and-color-on-VteTerminal-widgets-t.patch 0001-Add-the-style-context-provider-with-FALLBACK-priorit.patch * Fix CSS changes * https://deb.li/iiPrG | 13:45 |
| KGB-0 | vte2.91 ubuntu/master 65d2028 Iain Lane debian/changelog * Update changelog * https://deb.li/j3il | 13:45 |
| KGB-0 | vte2.91 ubuntu/master 1b87a2d Iain Lane debian/changelog * Finalise changelog * https://deb.li/3DPcI | 13:46 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Great, thanks! (The "remaining changes" part has the old patch name, though.) | 13:55 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: Now I see the purple background in gnome-terminal at least. :) | 14:30 |
| Laney | You can fix that when you backport it to Debian. :-) | 14:52 |
| Laney | oh I see, it was your remaining change, not mine. | 14:54 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: I can add that patch in Debian if you like, but it doesn't motivate a separate upload, does it? | 15:11 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: Probably not | 15:12 |
| GunnarHj | Laney: As a member of ubuntu-desktop I thought I could upload gnome-terminal, but that seems not to be the case. Any chance you can sponsor the uploads to hirsute and groovy? (The repo is done.) | 16:01 |
| === hellswor1 is now known as hellsworth | ||
| hellsworth | good morning desktopers! | 16:02 |
| GunnarHj | o/ hellsworth | 16:05 |
| hellsworth | hey there oSoMoN | 16:08 |
| oSoMoN | good morning hellsworth :) | 16:09 |
| Laney | GunnarHj: We'll see if I can squeeze it in today | 16:23 |
| Laney | morning hellsworth | 16:23 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: The reason why I needed to bother with hirsute too for the bug #1900729 groovy fix of gnome-terminal is simply the version string. So now I have prepared a hirsute merge and a groovy revert. I asked L_aney to sponsor, but he will probably not be too unhappy if you do that instead. :) | 16:26 |
| ubot5 | bug 1900729 in gnome-terminal (Ubuntu Groovy) "gnome-terminal font settings show only italic version of ubuntu mono" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1900729 | 16:26 |
| hellsworth | hey Laney GunnarHj | 16:38 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, I don't understand the version string issue? a SRU can be version differently | 19:40 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: It's currently the same version in groovy and hirsute. So if we would upload to groovy only, the version string would be lower than the one in hirsute, which I suppose would make the archive admins (including you?) unhappy. | 19:42 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: But this is not a problem since I also proposed a merge with Debian for hirsute. | 19:43 |
| GunnarHj | s/lower/higher/ | 19:43 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, that's not a problem if we have confidence the version is going to be higher before the end of the cycle | 19:45 |
| seb128 | which isn't likely to be an issue there | 19:45 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: Ah, didn't know that. Thought it always needed to follow 'the rule'. | 19:50 |
| seb128 | it's better but the SRU team is reasonable if you explain why it's not an issue | 19:51 |
| GunnarHj | Good to know going forward. | 19:51 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: But please feel free to still sponsor the hirsute merge. :) | 19:52 |
| seb128 | right | 19:54 |
| seb128 | it just needs uploading? | 19:54 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: Yes. | 19:57 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, Laney, g-t uploaded now | 20:29 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: Thanks, but I don't see it in the groovy queue. | 20:31 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, you said 'feel free to still sponsor the hirsute merge. :)' | 20:32 |
| seb128 | which is what I did | 20:32 |
| seb128 | so no it's not in groovy... | 20:32 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: Sorry, I meant *also*. groovy, i.e. bug #1900729, is the main goal. :) | 20:34 |
| ubot5 | bug 1900729 in gnome-terminal (Ubuntu Groovy) "gnome-terminal font settings show only italic version of ubuntu mono" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1900729 | 20:34 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, uploaded | 20:41 |
| GunnarHj | Thanks seb128! | 20:41 |
| seb128 | GunnarHj, thank you for working on the fixes! | 20:47 |
| GunnarHj | seb128: N.p. It proved to be much more into it than anticipated, but that tends to be the normal... | 20:49 |
| seb128 | :-) | 20:52 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
