[00:28] <gry> Hi, the two users' request in #ubuntu a few days ago ended up with this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed-hwe-5.4/+bug/2000491 being filed against what is a completely wrong package. further, nobody picked it up saying 'i confirm it is a valid bug report, it is also broken on my side' or 'i will try to fix it' or 'please try a git version' or whatever.
[00:28] -ubottu:#ubuntu-discuss- Launchpad bug 2000491 in linux-signed-hwe-5.4 (Ubuntu) "Dell Latitude 7390 running Ubuntu 18.04.6 fresh install system non-recoverable after screen lock and screen completely fades to black or after system goes into sleep" [Undecided, New]
[00:28] <gry> could someone here please help with categorizing it under the correct package
[00:29] <gry> i think it wasn't routed properly because of how improperly it was created in the first place
[00:49] <Eickmeyer> guiverc: That was your triage. ^
[00:51] <guiverc> Not sure I'd call it traige, a suggestion to try support only was offered & i didn't see later response
[01:13] <gry> guiverc: i mean is linux-signed-hwe correct for it?
[01:36] <Eickmeyer> Technically, linux-signed-hwe is a derivative package and it should be linux-hwe-5.4.
[01:36] <Eickmeyer> gry: ^%
[01:38] <Eickmeyer> Though, with 18.04 going EOSS in 4 months, the user probably should upgrade to 20.04 or newer.
[01:40] <Eickmeyer> 5.4 kernel might not play nice on a 8th gen Intel anyhow.
[01:40] <Eickmeyer> Which means it's a support issue and not a kernel issue.
[01:45] <guiverc> thanks Eickmeyer (was afk)
[01:47] <Eickmeyer> guiverc: NP, just didn't want to step on your toes there.
[01:47] <guiverc> not sure you'd do that; isn't in your nature I'm pretty sure.
[01:47] <Eickmeyer> You're too kind. :)
[01:49] <guiverc> :)
[02:39] <lotuspsychje> good morning
[02:51] <cartdrige> Hoi lotuspsychje .
[02:51] <cartdrige> What's up this morning?
[02:52] <lotuspsychje> morning cartdrige 
[02:55] <cartdrige> lotuspsychje, What hardware your using Ubuntu with?
[02:55] <cartdrige> like your day driver machine?
[02:55] <lotuspsychje> Client: HexChat 2.16.0 • OS: Ubuntu "jammy" 22.04 • CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-8250U CPU @ 1.60GHz (1,25GHz) • Memory: Physical: 11,3 GiB Total (9,1 GiB Free) Swap: 2,0 GiB Total (2,0 GiB Free) • Storage: 134,7 GB / 239,3 GB (104,5 GB Free) • VGA: Intel Corporation UHD Graphics 620 @ Intel Corporation Xeon E3-1200 v6/7th Gen Core Processor Host Bridge/DRAM Registers • Uptime: 27m 48s
[02:55] <lotuspsychje> this is my ubuntu LTS test lappy
[02:56] <lotuspsychje> i also got a NUC i7 for business running jammy 
[02:57] <cartdrige> Cool.
[02:57] <cartdrige> lotuspsychje, And you got all the drivers working out of the box on both machines?
[02:58] <lotuspsychje> well, wifi has been a flaky experience on jammy for me
[02:58] <lotuspsychje> i need to say focal was a lot more stable
[03:01] <cartdrige> I see, yea i remember i had issue on an i5 too with wifi drivers.
[03:01] <cartdrige> and 1 guy here helped me fixit out, the faulty driver was crashing the system.
[03:04] <gry> Eickmeyer: they have same issue with 20.04 and 22.10, see comment 2
[03:05] <cartdrige> I use Lubuntu here in fact, with an old fashion taskbar etc.
[03:05] <cartdrige> lxqt
[03:44] <Eickmeyer> gry: I didn't close the bug, but I feel like it might be a hardware issue at that point.
[03:52] <Eickmeyer> gry: Actually, based on the bug report, I confirm it's a CPU failure based on the user reporting "ometimes, when the system is rendered unresponsive as a result of any of the above, the power led is sending the message of "processor failure" (2 x amber blinks followed by 1 x white blink)." The laptop is 100% experiencing a hardware failure.
[11:04] <gry> Eickmeyer: it is interesting that it does this for two users who have the same cpu and gpu combination
[11:05] <gry> do they both have hardware failure
[11:07] <gry> how can they reproduce it in another OS, then?
[11:15] <daftykins> gry: if another OS behaves fine then i think it'd point to power management quirks, did you have them verify the current firmware version? 1.30.0 would appear to be the most up to date for a Latitude 7390
[11:18] <daftykins> tough to guess without some personal history, could have been damaged and be second hand - tough call